What do you think of the Chinese Social Credit system? Could such a system, perhaps in a modified form, have a positive effect on our society?

I find it an interesting system.

Yes, it is a pimk system to keep an eye on everything and everyone.Understandably, the Chinese aversion for ‘ chaos ‘ and the almost pathological desire for ‘ computability ‘. Where we see Westerners chaos as one of the qualities of man and the world around us, the Communist philosophers regard chaos as the great petty civil evil and everything must be predictable and calculable. The Chinese take this a step further, after all, the 4,000 years of complex civilization rest on their shoulders: the basic principle in the Chinese philosophical tradition what one calls “heavenly mandate” .What roughly means that as soon as the people begin to murmur, are dissatisfied, or otherwise happen to calamity, the administration has apparently failed and may take place for the next dynasty. For the current ruling dynasty, that of the Communist Party of China (CPC), the credit system is also a way to quickly detect bottlenecks in society: Now the people are still satisfied with a roof over the head, a stuffed fridge, a Affordable Health Insurance fund and the latest smartphone at your fingertips. But is that tomorrow too? And the day after tomorrow? After all, as soon as the people go murmur the mandate is gone and may pack the CPC to make way for the next.

But the system is not so much geared to penalise, but above all to reward.And that, of course, is not an unknown principle in the West (see: Nudge theory, Gamification, etc). But Xi Jinping declared war on poverty and social inequality some time ago. The social lending system is one of the instruments apparently found, while the head broke on a number of issues that have been in the industrial Revolution since the beginning:

  • Being poor is more expensive than being rich.
  • Whoever is born poor will most likely also die poor.

And this is the beauty of a reward system that does not look at one’s origins or position on the social ladder: free from ‘ Born with a golden spoon ‘ or ‘ coincidentally at the right school with the right parents ‘, this system rewards people with ambition that development Pursuing.

Of course, in the Netherlands (and any other modern liberal social-democracy) we are also trying to pursue the reward of ambition and development.Especially by setting up a surcharge circus for those who do not elevate themselves. We are also letting poor people study. People who grew up in a popular neighbourhood can also study philosophy of law. Does not mean that there is much further to this, because one is not of the right hockey club, or not praeses at the right dispute. But it could be, provided, but, unless and luck-factor. And Chinese do not like “provided, but, unless and luck-factor”. That is ‘ chaos ‘ and ‘ incalculable ‘.

Yes, such a system could also work fine here.

After all, We already have a wirwarlet of credit scores.From BKR to databases of Webshops. The only thing still missing is a company or body that comes up once with a larger, more extensive variant, and one is to. Discounts at bol.com, unregistered credit options at Zalando.It will amaze you how fast the consumer is. No, you don’t need to join. But then you won’t get two-for-one access to the sauna or a free cup of coffee at La Place.

The biggest problem, where all companies, institutions and individuals have been struggling since the invention of money: does this customer pay us?

You can come to a bank for a loan, but the bank streamates you. Was your business plan full of holes?Wasn’t your collateral considered conclusive? Did it lay to that coffee spot on your shirt? Maybe your surname? The famous banker John Pierpont Morgan (of JP Morgan Chase) once said: “Though he has all the bonds in the Christendom as collateral.If his character doesn’t click with me, he doesn’t get a penny. “

And that sounds weird.Because most people think: from a bald chicken one cannot pick.But the people with money think: but a bald chicken can still lay eggs, and the even sharp ones among us then ask the question: is this chicken then the chicken that lays golden eggs?

And when that last question can be answered by means of data and higher mathematics and deep learning, we also have a social credit system.

“Oops, anyway but neat to keep the speed here, because then I get a free Latte Machiatto at the next tank turn.”

Of course, you don’t have to join.But the mortgage lender is also not obliged to give you a mortgage. And the mortgage lender wants only one thing: to be sure that you are wearing nicely every month. And that mortgage lender doesn’t believe you on your beautiful eyes, but wants tough guarantees. Guarantees that can give such a credit score much better than your parents ‘ house as collateral.

Now we are still saying to our children that if they do good enough and but are motivated enough, they can be anything.Is Of course just such a big lie as Sinterklaas, but there they need to find out when they are out of the house. Then the world Turns out to be a little bit less easy to put together. And once ‘ it ‘ fails (whatever that may be), one is doubting: I spent 60 hours a week, wasn’t that enough to do my best? Was it my motivation? And then they become deeply unhappy, depressed even. But luckily the doctor has a pill for that.

On the other hand, a social credit system can put exactly the finger on the sore spot.

And that is what the Chinese system does: the data, and the elaboration of the data collected, and the management of that data in the hands where they belong, namely to the citizen himself.

No, it’s not Big Brother Is Watching You.You are your own Big Brother.

It is a useful system for the government to better monitor their citizens.As long as we do not want an authoritarian state, I would not want to see it in our society, it is easy to give people who do not agree with you as a politician or dictator ‘ minus points ‘.

I find it quite dramatic.A largely automated system to ‘ reward ‘ and ‘ punish ‘ on socially acceptable or dubious behavior seems pretty dramatic to me. It takes away any form of nuance. Suppose you have a bad relationship with your parents, you will still get penalty points every time you don’t call them. It deprives us of our humanity.

Doodeng: 1984 “Big Brother is Watching You” in real!

It seems to me to be something to counter the leased-up of society.

I would first like to experience how it will work in practice, I am not afraid in advance of “Big Brother is watching you.”

“Absolute power corrupts absolute” is a quote that applies to it.

China is already known to kill prisoners for organs (if you do not believe this you must compare the statistics of organ donations and organ transplants).

It is just the question, we can trust a government like the Chinese government to deal well with confidential information, at the moment they are already locking up people because of their political views/their beliefs.Is it wrong for a government to deal with the behaviour of citizens on such a large scale and to monitor this in such a way.

People with too low a score cannot get a job, this is a way to enforce a particular behaviour on the citizen.It is also very undesirable that this happened in such a way. Freedom is one of the most important things we have in the Western world, this system is at odds with this.

Analyzing Data can in principle be used well, for example, to be able to spot some psychological disorders in a timely manner.To give people jobs because they have a certain score that seems pretty crooked. I advise you to go and watch the Black Mirror episode nosedive, which is also a scoring system.

What do you think of the Chinese Social Credit system?Could such a system, perhaps in a modified form, have a positive effect on our society?

We are against camera surveillance, but if your daughter is harassed you are only happy if there is a camera on which you can see everything.

Many people are quiet, no one bother, are helpful and obedient.People who just score high on a social credit system. They benefit from it.

Other people are unadapted idiots.Passionate, drug users, lazy, thief-like, dishonest and you name it. These score low and therefore have limited possibilities.

A large group is meeloper.If the government actively stimulates socially desirable behaviour, then this group will also behave better by itself.

Now, of course, it is not only about social behaviour, but also of politically desirable behaviour.China is a dictatorship and people who criticize the party must of course also be punished. This is also desirable because what you have to politically conscious young people, who bring only unrest. Human rights are all nice and nice, but you do not buy anything. Even in Dutch politics one is not put on snoopers and Afaires prefers to be covered with the cloak of love. The receipts Afaire and the Afaire with Henry Keizer did not do the VVD well and only brings unrest. Really socially adapted journalists know they can only ask friendly questions.

The one party system as in China is, in terms of stability, a superior system.One can really pursue long-term policies. The fact that the Prime Minister has been able to appoint himself in his lust for life is hardly important. The government is ultimately a whole cabal of people, who has made within the party career. They have proven themselves and may seem more like a senior official than a politician. They know how you can achieve your goal with folds and ironing. The action of China in Tibet and Uzgoeristan shows the strength of the party. Opposition is mercilessly pressed down. Now the good ones still have to suffer with the evilis, to with a proper information tracking system, the rotten apples can be even better.

Recently we have seen some folk rebellions in Egypt and Syria have reached.Is an enlightened dictatorship not better?

The two-party system as in the USA is disastrous.The country is actually permanently in a civil war. The laws that one adopts in one period try to abolish them in the next one. The comedy around Brexit also shows the merits of a two-party system.

A more party system is barely better.Left and right, clowns like clover, Baudet and Wilders show the tone, but in the middle you only have gentlemen who run like perky cocks with their butt to get the favor of the voter. Nothing no policy just posturing. In China, there is nothing to do with such childenness. Why vote if officials make the policy?

Another aspect of the Chinese state are the (political) prisoners.In a prison system, the guards are automatically cruel. The guards who represent the system behave just as antisocial, and the prisoners will behave much more socially. This is contrary to a social lending system. But maybe this is not important. In An ants nest there are workers and soldiers. As long as the guards behave neatly in their spare time they can also build up credit.

If you were to translate the same system to the Netherlands, you simply cannot be against the royal house and you should not criticise the EU either.Extremists who are politically concerned disappear in prison and the people may, in predetermined places, swing with their flags as the king passes by.

I don’t see what is wrong with this.

The tracking systems used in the West are not meant to make people behave socially desirable, but to sell the people of everything.While business is subject to the state in China, the business community is trying to submit to the State. We live in a consumer paradise, but are just as subject to the Chinese citizen. Whether we are better at this is just the question.

Finally.Perhaps you’re getting worse at the tone of my answer, remember that with this answer in China I would forgo my credit.

Leave a Reply