LifeSiteNews has been permanently banned on YouTube. Click HERE to sign up to receive emails when we add to our video library.
March 12, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) – In a blog post on its website, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) proposed a system of social credit scoring similar to the kind already in use in Communist China that would determine people’s credit eligibility based on internet history, leading to concerns that such a system could be turned against anyone who opposes the will of financial and globalist leaders.
The concepts that the IMF proposes are already being quietly promoted and practiced, notably in China, but also in the U.K., where trials are underway involving widespread covert internet surveillance and data recording.
The blog post in question, entitled “What is really new in Fintech,” appeared on the IMF website in December 2020 and was drawn up by four men: Arnoud Boot, a professor of finance at the University of Amsterdam; Peter Hoffmann and Luc Laeven, both economists with the European Central Bank; and Lev Ratnovski, an economist with the IMF but currently with the European Central Bank.
It addressed the questions of how new innovations would change the face of finance, as well as the “challenges” that these developments would bring, particularly with regard to the growing challenge to traditional banking, which is posed by the rise of Big Tech.
In response to this issue, the paper proposed a system of social credit born out of one’s online activities. It pointed to “information,” which the authors described as having “new tools to collect and analyze data on customers, for example for determining creditworthiness.”
Credit scoring the future of finance
In a section entitled “New types of information,” the authors casually revealed how online activities could, and seemingly already are, being used to determine a social credit score. “The most transformative information innovation is the increase in use of new types of data coming from the digital footprint of customers’ various online activities — mainly for credit-worthiness analysis.”
The article continued, “Credit scoring using so-called hard information (income, employment time, assets and debts) is nothing new.” But the authors next noted two problems: first, that accurate data was hard to come by, and second, that some people may not have enough “hard data available.”
In order to cope with these issues, the IMF blog proposed “tapping various non-financial data.” This would include “the type of browser and hardware used to access the internet, the history of online searches and purchases.” Such digital tracking could render more reliable results in determining credit, the article argued.
In the paper that the four researchers wrote, they stated that “combining credit scores and digital footprint further improves loan default predictions.” Their proposal was based on previous “credit scoring and securitization,” the authors argued, adding that “(t)he key new development is the abundance of non-financial data, including from digital footprints, which can be used in financial services provision.”
Reporting on the paper, Gizmodo wrote that its authors “believe that this approach could result in greater lending to borrowers who would potentially be denied by traditional financial institutions.”
While the actual paper and subsequent blog post are relatively short, the message promoted under the banner of the IMF is by no means inconsequential. By using the “digital footprint,” i.e. an individual’s online history, as a means for “credit-worthiness analysis,” the IMF is essentially proposing a scheme that is set to be manipulated at the whim of whoever is in control. The blog post argued that internet history could be used to improve the accurate assessment of credit “worthiness,” but left unsaid was what would happen to anyone who was deemed not worthy enough to qualify.
The IMF’s plan seems to be drawn straight from the policies of China’s Communist Party (CCP). Over the past number of years, China has been developing and implementing a social credit system, whereby Chinese citizens are given certain permissions (or not) in society depending on their social credit score. All elements of life are drawn from when tabulating the score, be it official or government records, documentation about illegal behavior, or even reports filed by neighbors.
Steven Mosher, founder of the Population Research Institute and regular LifeSiteNews columnist, described the system in 2019. Mosher painted the picture in which normal and essential aspects of daily life depended upon the one’s score in the system: “A low social credit score will exclude you from well-paid jobs, make it impossible for you to get a house or a car loan or even book a hotel room. The government will slow down your internet connection, ban your children from attending private schools and even post your profile on a public blacklist for all to see.”
Mosher described the “laolai,” a phenomena unimagined in Western countries. Laolai are people who fall foul of the system, land on the bottom of the de facto caste system, and even are subjected to a specific, mobile ringtone that will clearly denote them as laolai when in public. In fact, social media app WeChat hosts a government-produced map that locates every laolai in the vicinity.
Chinese citizens can earn points by reporting on anyone who they observe to be breaking the law, or fostering a culture of distrust and fear. Mosher mentioned how some people are even arrested as a result of a low credit score, “(n)ot because they have actually committed a crime, but because they are likely to.”
The Chinese social credit system is evocative of the fictional Black Mirror episode “Nosedive,” in which a young woman obsessively tries to raise her social credit score in order to be able to access elite housing options and be more popular.
What weight does the IMF’s proposal have?
On face value, the IMF’s post and research paper might appear far less insidious than China’s system. However, the import of the proposal must not be ignored, precisely because of who is making it. The IMF has 190 member countries and its aim is to ensure the “stability of the international monetary system,” as well as all “macroeconomic and financial sector issues” related to global stability.
Its partner organization, the World Bank, is similarly composed of 189 member countries. Together, the two groups oversee and structure large swathes of the global economy.
Additionally, two of the blog post’s authors, Laeven and Ratnovski, are listed as “Agenda Contributors” on the World Economic Forum’s (WEF) site. The WEF, founded by globalist Klaus Schwab, has as its “agenda” a “Great Reset” of capitalism, finance, and global affairs, which is to be brought about in the light of COVID-19.
Schwab’s anti-freedom and anti-Christian Great Reset initiative calls for “new foundations for our economic and social systems,” as well as “a new social contract that honors the dignity of every human being.” One vision of the future after the Great Reset is the much-publicized article positing a world in which private ownership is nonexistent and all products have become services offered at the whim of the government.
What might be classified as being credit worthy?
What the IMF blog left notably unsaid was what might serve as a basis in determining the possibility of one’s “creditworthiness.” However, an examination of the IMF’s own goals sheds light on the issue. Among its key priorities are “climate change” and the United Nations’ pro-abortion Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s)..
LifeSiteNews has previously revealed how commitment to the green agenda and the SDGs are a key part of the Great Reset and could well determine whether one has access to finance or not in the future. In fact, Schwab himself proposed an example of how a coal-fired power plant could be crippled by investors freezing its capital in retaliation for non-compliance with green policies.
In the past few years, the Network of Central Banks and Supervisors for Greening the Financial System (NGFS) has also been established, with the aim of fundamentally changing global finance in line with green policies. Like the IMF and the World Bank, the financial purview of the NGFS is vast – its members supervise “all of the global systemically important banks and two-thirds of global systemically important insurers.” The IMF and the World Bank are official observers in the NGFS.
Vaccine adherence as a criteria for creditworthiness?
Another important aspect is to be considered in relation to what might qualify an individual for “creditworthiness;” namely, adherence to the global COVID-19 vaccination agenda.
The IMF has made very clear its own commitment to the vaccine rollout. So too has the Word Bank. Schwab has also recently stated how “nobody will be safe” until “everybody” is vaccinated against the virus. He was in turn echoing billionaire vaccine promoter Bill Gates, who uttered a similar statement in April 2020, just weeks into the “pandemic.”
In short, the major financial global governing bodies, along with the key orchestrators of the globalist agenda, Schwab and Gates, are heavily pushing widespread or even mandatory vaccination for COVID-19 as a prerequisite for any access to what was until recently considered normal life.
With such executive promotion of the vaccination program, a correlation between vaccination and “creditworthiness” is very easy to foresee, especially when Israel is already enforcing a “medical Apartheid,” banning citizens from everyday life if they have not been vaccinated.
The names and personal information of those who have refused the vaccine are also being collected in order to be handed over to officials through the country, who will take measures to “encourage” vaccination. Such a situation is not too dissimilar from descriptions of the laolai in China.
Secret internet tracking and credit score systems already being implemented
In fact, while the IMF is advocating the policy of establishing “creditworthiness,” the practice is already in existence, albeit in various forms, with banks moving to prevent access to funds for those it deems not worthy to access them.
HSBC Bank recently announced plans to cancel the account of any customer who entered the bank without a face mask.
Bank of America dug through its customers records in order to help federal prosecutors identify people who took part in the January 6 rally for President Trump and Capitol protests. Once again, the similarity to the treatment of the Chinese laolai is not hard to discern.
And in case the IMF’s concept of widespread internet tracking seems too much like a far-fetched conspiracy, for the last two years the U.K. has already been experimenting with surveillance technology that could record the internet history of everyone in the country.
Wired recently reported that tests are secretly being performed by two unnamed internet providers in conjunction with the Home Office and the National Crime Agency, which record the “who, what, where, why and when of your digital life,” and can save this information for up to 12 months. The trial is permitted due to the controversial Investigatory Powers Act 2016, an act that was dubbed by former CIA whistleblower Edward Snowden, as “the most extreme surveillance in the history of western democracy.”
Should the tests prove acceptable to the Home Office, then the system could be rolled out to the whole country, meaning that the entire nation would be subject to complete scrutiny any time they used a phone or computer.
Nor is this the only way in which the U.K. is quietly putting in place the IMF’s plan. The government is currently proposing a digital ID network, which would prove one’s identity in any situation, such as setting up a bank, buying a house, or taking out a loan. The ID would also be able to provide history and evidence of a person’s vaccination status.
Clearly then, the current financial censorship and the IMF’s call for a system of creditworthiness based on one’s internet activities must be viewed in tandem with the huge push by the IMF, the World Bank, the WEF, and influential globalists such as Schwab and Gates, for adherence to the green and vaccination agendas.
Could it be that one’s credit score will soon be based on any opposition to COVID vaccines or the green agenda, creating a global system of “laolai” who are rejected by vaccine-promoting globalists?