China is working hard to develop a social credit system in which the government can monitor all citizens almost continuously. Citizens are then given a score based on this behaviour. Depending on the score, the citizens are rewarded or punished. In this way, citizens can accrue social credit with the government or forfeit it.
Keeping citizens in line
What kind of behaviour is monitored? The answer is practically all behaviour, including payment behaviour, political behaviour and behaviour in public. Failure to pay bills or to pay them on time results in penalty points; if you walk through a red light when crossing a street, this event will be registered by a facial recognition system. And anything you say in public can be traced back to you, which can have consequences. If you have debts, you will not be allowed to take a plane trip, your children will not be allowed to go to certain schools, or your debts will simply be made public for everyone to see. These are just a few of the possible consequences. Linking databases in combination with speech recognition and facial recognition in public provides the state with almost endless possibilities to keep citizens in line.
Fascinating and terrifying
In 2018, an in-depth report on the system was presented on the VPRO programme Door het hart van China (Through the heart of China) and was described concisely in an article in the NRC (2019). It is as fascinating as it is terrifying – at least for citizens living in Western democracies under rule of law. What particularly surprised me was that many people in China seem to be positive about this system, but this assumes that the respondents also dared to give their honest opinion. They apparently believe that the system creates decent, law-abiding people, and who doesn't want their fellow citizens to behave decently?
Farewell to tolerance
About 20 years ago, the social and political mood in the Netherlands started to shift from an emphasis on the proverbial Dutch tolerance to focusing more on 'values and norms' and to good manners in mutual contact. The government's characteristic policy of tolerance made way for more emphasis on control and enforcement.
In the societal and political discourse in the Netherlands, there has always been a debate about the balance between freedom and its limitations, between privacy and public disclosure, and between individual responsibility and regulations to be enforced. The opinions on these aspects almost always differ widely. But with all political shifts and with all differences of opinion, there is agreement on one fundamental point: the government is there for us and not the other way around. This also means that the power of the government is limited.
Social credit versus social capital
In the Chinese social credit system people have to earn social credit from the government. In the Netherlands, we focus on social capital, not social credit. Social capital refers to the reservoir of social energy of citizens themselves, their propensity to commit themselves to other people or social goals, their willingness to join together informally or formally and the mutual trust that goes with this process. A real democracy needs social capital. It thrives on the social capital of the society.
Cultivating social capital
That social capital is not just there. It must be cultivated and nurtured. If not, there is a risk that people will withdraw to their own islands and focus mainly on their own material affairs.
The French thinker Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859) already observed this in the 19th century. He saw that Christianity fuelled social capital. That was not only the case in the past; studies have shown time and again that this is also the case today. Culturally, our society is still steeped in this attitude. We may also find new, additional sources to fuel social capital. In any case, the importance of social capital for a democratic society is clear.
Democracy is more than technology. This conclusion also emerges from the work of Tocqueville. Democracy is a cultural asset. Social capital is cultural wealth. Participating in and contributing to that process is completely different from having to earn credit points with the government – or unexpectedly having to forfeit them.
This article by Sophie van Bijsterveld, professor of Religion, Law and Society at Radboud University, previously appeared on the blog Tocqueville, Religie en Democratie.
Photo: WikimediaImages via Pixabay