Manchurian Credit Hysteria

Social Credit! Horror! The term summons visions of the totalitarian Chinese system of Zhima/Sesame Credit, as implemented by AFSB, a subsidiary of the corporate behemoth Alibaba. The fear is not unjustified. As Chinese megacorps purchase stakes in more & more of the American technocracy, when they are not opening American markets directly, as they have with the extremely popular launch of TikTok (originally “ByteDance”)- they are at the very least inspiring some of our domestic technocratic “allies.” Credit Sesame, displaying the utmost of creativity in its naming, is already with us in America as a “credit score” service. What is strange is how little this has been discussed or clamored over, compared to the conservative knee-jerk reaction to Andrew Yang’s “Modern Time Banking” policy. The Daily Caller published this headline: “DEMOCRATIC 2020 CANDIDATE WANTS GOVERNMENT-SPONSORED ‘SOCIAL CREDIT’ SYSTEM COMPARABLE TO CHINA’S”

The article walks back its implication (though the damage has been done, as no one really reads the articles). Suggesting that one thing is “comparable” to another is, of course, a truism. Apples are comparable to oranges, though apples are not oranges. The Blaze published an article titled “Democrat entrepreneur Andrew Yang proposes government-run ‘social credits’ system akin to China’s” — akin, a bit stronger than “comparable”- with a stronger implication. Last of these, Hayride, really took its readers for one with the bombastic title: “Democratic candidate for president wants communist social credit system in US like China’s.”

Of course, the claims in the first two titles were walked back after consulting with Yang’s campaign, which noted the voluntary nature of Yang’s proposal, as well as its lack of any sort of punitive consequences which people associate with the Sesame system. The third article, on the other hand, ends with the suggestion that: “voters should send Yang back to China.”

It’s been a quite ironic fate for the term “Social Credit”- which first appeared in the works of CH Douglas, which spawned the “Social Credit Movement” of the 20th century, inspiring people such as Ezra Pound. It was once a household name, so much so that Wyndham Lewis noted the ubiquity of people whom he called “Credit Cranks” amongst the Modernists. TS Eliot, William Carlos Williams, Aldous Huxley… It’s not exactly something you’ll find in your history books, but it made a larger impact in Canadian politics. A Social Credit Party was formed & championed by “Bible Bill” Aberhart. It never achieved its aims, but it was popular enough to stick around as a party in Alberta until 1971.

Yang’s platform has much in common with the Social Credit system of Douglas, & this will be the subject of a future article. As Yang references, perepetually, in his talk track, the notion of a Citizen’s Dividend goes back to Thomas Paine’s Agrarian Justice & the founding of the Republic. Paine was himself rooted in the literature of 18th century Physiocrats (of course, the idea has classical parallels, as in the debate between Aristedes & Themistocles that Plutarch described). A chain of influence can be discerned stretching as far back into History as is available. It has never really disappeared, although it has never really become “mainstream.” Henry George, the namesake of Georgism & Geolibertarianism (or Geoanarchism), emerged from this same millieu, as did many other figures, such as Owen, Proudhon, Tolstoy, Josiah Warren, Benjamin Tucker, Henry Thoreau, etc. The 19th century saw much more than a debate between “Liberalism” & “Marxism”- & its intellectual diversity was broad & deep. These things remain on the outskirts of public knowledge, & outside of the normative “Overton’s Window” of “Liberals” & “Conservatives.” However, they have become more relevant today, as they were engaging in debates over the consequences of the Industrial Revolution — & in the midst of our own “Fourth Industrial Revolution” — we shall inevitably retread the same grounds.

Rather, the subject of this essay is Yang’s particular policy that people are “comparing” to the Chinese system, which is listed on his campaign website as “Modern Time Banking.” What is interesting about this name is that it contains a reference to a nearly unknown element of American history which I happen to know quite well (I even wrote a paper on it as a precocious teenage anarchist). What I am talking about is The Cincinnati Time Store, established by Josiah Warren, an American Individualist-Anarchist, Mutualist, Voluntarist… but mostly Owenite, who is known as the “first american anarchist.” Essentially, the store worked by creating its own currency, in the form of labor vouchers, which could be exchanged for an equivalent number of hours of labor. This is the kernel of Warren’s “Plan for a Cincinatti Labor for Labor Store” written in 1829: “any exchanges of articles and personal services are made, so that he who employs five or ten hours of his time, in the service of another, receives five or ten hours labour of the other in return.”

190 years later, Yang’s Modern Time Banking system is proposed as, not a particular Time Store, but a decentralized sub-economy or gig-economy of Labor for Labor, administered by the State, but manned voluntarily. The way I have described it is “Augmented Reality Gamification of Community Service.” Essentially, a game not unlike Pokemon Go, which incentivizes tasks like: cleaning up parks, fixing a neighbor’s car, shoveling driveways… From the Yang Campaign site: “Signing up for an account would allow you to track your running tally, along with an “unspent” total. As noted above, you could offer time banking points to a neighbor for watering your plants or taking your mail in while you’re away. But there could also be specific promotions where you could trade in your points for special experiences, such as tickets to a local ball game or meeting with a government or civic leader.”

Warren’s Time Store was actually quite a success in his time. In Kemple’s history of the institution he wrote: “it was the most popular mercantile institution in the city.” It only closed when Warren moved away, to start his “Modern Time” Community- one of the many attempted utopias that were created in 19th century america. The idea never really disappeared, it’s simply been on the fringe. Time Banks/Stores continue to exist in America. You can search https://timebanks.org for one in your locality.

They are not particularly well-staffed at this juncture, but why would they be? No one has ever heard of them! Such is the issue with most of these ideas, & the main problem that Andrew Yang is facing in his bid for presidency. However, this is no reason to write off the idea. What separates the 21st century from all centuries prior is the existence of technologies that enable the spread of such ideas. Rather than having a network of particular Time Stores, a centralized Time-Store ap, bolstered by the State, could attract a large user base in a short period of time were it to be implemented. There is no reason to fear the State somehow deploying this to some pernicious end, as it is an entirely voluntary program, & represents the complete opposite of the Chinese Social Credit system, which is mandatory & harmful. At its worst, it would be ineffective, but at its best? Well, we can only imagine. & that is the source of its appeal. It is not a service so much as it is a platform which users will direct to their own creative ends. It is an opportunity for organic emergent order, & not order imposed from above.