Social Credit Systems: Big Brother Is Watching
A few weeks ago, I described a world in which the government tracks every penny you spend and restricts what you can buy based on your spending habits or its social agenda. Today we examine a tool that when combined with a digital currency makes an authoritarian’s dream come true, social credit systems.
One of the many Orwellian episodes of “Black Mirror” describes a world in which mobile devices and eye implants are used to share and rate peoples’ daily interactions ultimately culminating in a score determining one’s socioeconomic status. While it may be some time before the world sees this, “Nosedive” has been widely compared to the Social Credit System being developed by the government of China.
The professed purpose of the Chinese system is to provide financial and social credit scores alongside a national blacklist database. The origin of the system lies in a desire to provide a financial credit system for individuals and small businesses, especially in rural areas, which lacked documented records. This would provide citizens with a service not unlike that provided by Equifax and Transunion for American/Canadian citizens.
It would differ in that it would also have a social assessment function that would seek to address trust issues “such as food safety scandals, labor law violations, intellectual property thefts, and corruption…to help Chinese people trust each other again.” Currently, there are multiple pilots underway, and a single national Social Credit Score does not exist.
This all sounds well and good so what’s the problem?
In 2018, U.S. VP Mike Pence described the Chinese social credit system as "an Orwellian system premised on controlling virtually every facet of human life." Criticism has also come from the left with George Soros saying in 2019 that it would give the Chinese government "total control over the people of China.” These concerns, while real, may be a little premature.
The Chinese plans are very much in flux. Adjustments made based on pilot program findings and Covid appear to have slowed progress and much of the concern in the West has been criticized as misreporting and misperceptions so an analysis must focus on how such a system could be abused rather than how it is being used.
The Financial rating component of this system is the least troublesome. In 2016 the authorities recommended that those with “outstanding financial credit records” be given preferential treatment by market entities. In other words, “market entities” in China should behave like capitalist ones. Enabling companies/individuals with good credit to borrow money is hardly authoritarian. The problem would arise from the workings of the Social Credit Rating System.
Social Credit Rating
The main concerns with social credit scores come down to three areas:
Scoring
Penalties
Reporting
The numerous Chinese pilots provide some idea of what could be penalized. These have included failure to pay fines, “violence against doctors…refusal to comply with pandemic prevention measures, and wildlife trade violations” but also petitioning the government, making comments online, cheating in online games, and even for littering. Realistically, the number of “anti-social” behaviors that could be tracked is almost limitless but more concerning may be the suggested penalties.
As a financial credit system, whatever is tracked could potentially impact an individual’s credit score. Imagine being denied a mortgage because you cheated in online games or littered. Penalties however, would unlikely be restricted to financial credit scores and the pilot programs show us that the authorities have toyed with travel restrictions and flight bans. China’s existing blacklist system includes restrictions on:
Leasing "high-grade" office buildings, hotels, or apartments
Purchasing "non-business essential" vehicles
Purchasing real estate
Sending children to private schools
Travelling via plane, high-speed train, or first-class non-high-speed train
Other non-life and non-work essential consumption behaviors.
The final bullet proves that the limits come down to what the government is willing and permitted to do and as Samantha Hoffman of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute points out, “in China there is no such thing as the rule of law.”
A Chinese social credit system would rely on an extensive policing and monitoring system including CCTV and internet surveillance and integration with the police and the courts, but it would also likely rely on the citizens as well.
The history of the Soviet Union provides a real-life demonstration of what happens when citizens are encouraged to report on each other. Snitching under Stalin was a way of life, not just to prove one’s loyalty to the state but as a means of getting payback for real and perceived slights. Citizens might even see their credit scores increased for reporting “anti-social” behavior. Think of it as a reward program for snitches, “see something, say something, earn reward points.”
Should we be worried?
While many in the West have voiced concerns over the dystopian potential of the Chinese system, too many others seem unconcerned, pointing out that the Chinese have so far shied away from the more draconian measures as if “hasn’t abused it” equates to “will never abuse it.” Even more concerning are those who see its “potential” to promote “social order” and guard citizens’ “safety.” One need only look at the UK and US to understand how attractive this is to many:
Great Britain, already one of the most surveilled countries has rating systems that use data from credit scores, phone usage, and rent payments to determine access to social services, filter job applications, and influence custodial decisions.
In the US, which has more CCTV cameras per capita than any other country (yes, including China), private companies, including Merrill Lynch, have begun to use ESG scores to help lenders decide “who they extend services or credit.” If you have a steady job, pay your bills on time, and save money you may still not qualify for a mortgage if your energy bill or waste management practices don’t measure up. From diginex:
Conclusion
For the time being the world is some time away from a social credit system like that described in Black Mirror. However, this does not mean we shouldn’t be concerned. Evidence shows that bureaucracies, public and private, desire control, and as James Madison pointed out power is prone to abuse.
The essence of Government is power; and power, lodged as it must be in human hands, will ever be liable to abuse.
-- James Madison
Our greatest protection from this threat is, ironically, also our greatest danger, our fellow citizens. In a democracy, it should not be possible to implement a social credit system unless we want it. However, those who desire it have two powerful tools, claims that it will combat “threats to safety” and the average citizen’s belief that “if you have nothing to hide, why worry?”
Today there are still voices in government who oppose social credit systems, rightly viewing them as Orwellian. Times and politicians change though. Politicians who now say “we won’t…” can quickly move to “circumstances have changed but it’s only temporary” and finally “it’s for your safety, get used to it.” Westerners have little to fear from Chinese Social Credit Systems but the same may not always be true if we let our own governments and private corporations use them.
Wrong Speak is a free-expression platform that allows varying viewpoints. All views expressed in this article are the author's own.
 | A guest post by
|
Social credit scoring is already available. Credit card usage is provided to government entities and probably other entities with very little problems.
There's no if, but or maybe. Social credit scoring gives way too much power to the state over the individual and even the collective of individuals called a republic. The problem is the current world governments don't give a rat's ass what you or I think and given half a chance they will implement it whether we like it or not. Shut it down now.