Bad “Social Credit” By James Reed
The Douglas social credit movement now faces a major problem, as the very term, “social credit,” has been taken over by the Chinese commos, for a diabolic technocratic system of Maoist style punishments and social control, but this bad “social credit” is now being applied in the West to, against the Dissent Right, and soon alternative finance folk:
“In theory, police don’t have to show up at the suspect’s door to make him pay for his disobedience. China’s social credit system automatically tracks the words and actions, online and off, of every Chinese citizen, and grants rewards or demerits based on obedience. A Chinese who does something socially positive—helping an elderly neighbor with a chore, or listening to a speech of leader Xi Jinping—receives points toward a higher social credit score. On the other hand, one who does something negative—letting his or her dog poop on the sidewalk, for example, or making a snarky comment on social media—suffers a social-credit downgrade.
Because digital life, including commercial transactions, is automatically monitored, Chinese with high social credit ratings gain privileges. Those with lower scores find daily life harder. They aren’t allowed to buy high speed train tickets or take flights. Doors close to certain restaurants. Their children may not be allowed to go to college. They may lose their job and have a difficult time finding a new one. And a social-credit scofflaw will find himself isolated, as the algorithmic system downgrades those who are connected to the offender.
The bottom line: a Chinese citizen cannot participate in the economy or society unless he has the mark of approval from Xi Jinping, the country’s all-powerful leader. In a cashless society, the state has the power to bankrupt dissidents instantly by cutting off access to the internet. And in a society in which everyone is connected digitally, the state can make anyone an instant pariah when the algorithm turns them radioactive, even to their family.
OK, but what would happen here in the West if private enterprise started imposing an informal social credit system on us? Gavin Haynes, writing for the UK commentary site UnHerd, says that it’s already happening to far-right people. He gives the example of white identitarians in the UK who were without warning refused service from their banks — including access to their money. There are other cases, including here in the US (e.g., Laura Loomer). Excerpt:
You don’t want to mess with the people who make the widgets that undergird the financial system. In 2018, in response to activist pressure, MasterCard began choking off various far-Right and internet Right figures. That in turn meant their often lucrative Patreon accounts were cancelled: YouTube ‘Classical Liberal’ Carl Benjamin lost $12000 a month. Now, in a post-Covid world, where we’re often being told that cash is no longer acceptable, some are also being told that electronic banking is no longer for them. It’s an interesting crossroads.
The likes of [far right activist Laura] Towler might be distasteful. But if that alone is the bar for the arbitrary exercise of power by, say, the PR department of NatWest, then all kinds of people — from Cat Bin Lady down — stand to be unpersoned.
Right of admission is always reserved — we all know this — and you might say that these examples are just the market at work. Except that some things are so fundamental to our everyday lives that they’re not so much markets as the thing that you need in order to use a market.
In the dying days of Gordon Brown, an attempt was made to guarantee every citizen’s right to a current account. It was quickly shot down by the Big Five banks (after all, it wasn’t as if they owed the government any favours). A decade on, that tide is further out than it has ever been.”
This bad “social credit,” technocracy, is set to be rolled out to squash Trump voters, which is why Leftist are busy collecting names, URRS/Maoist Cultural Revolution style, for punishment.
I am not sure what to do about the degradation of the term “social credit.” Would “Douglas finance,” be salvageable? We should never underestimate the damage tht the tyranny of words can do to a movement.
Comments