In partnership with
Does Social Credit Score negatively affect Capitalism and “the American Way”?
Email Was Only the Beginning
Four years in the making. One event that will change everything.
On November 13, beehiiv is redefining what it means to create online with their first-ever virtual Winter Release Event.
This isn’t just an update or a new feature. It’s a revolution in how content is built, shared, and owned. You don’t want to miss this.
From social media arrests in Britain to frozen bank accounts and the rise of digital ID systems, new forms of control are reshaping freedom and finance. As governments and corporations gain power over speech and identity, critics warn of a creeping “social credit” future. Could these trends quietly undermine capitalism—and the American way itself?
The Story
In recent years, questions about free speech, privacy, financial access, and identity have become deeply intertwined. Arrests over social media content, frozen or closed bank accounts for political or other “suspicious” reasons, proposals for digital IDs, and even social credit scoring systems are stirring debate: Do they erode capitalism and core American values—or are they reasonable trade-offs in a changing world?
Britain already has criminal laws that enable arrests (or charges) over social media posts. The legal basis includes:
The Communications Act 2003 (Section 127) — criminalizing messages over electronic networks that are “grossly offensive,” “menacing,” or “indecent.”
The Malicious Communications Act 1988 — targeting messages intended to cause distress or that are “offensive.”
Laws against public order offences, hate speech, incitement, terrorism-related content, defamation, or contempt of court.
In practice, people have been arrested under these laws for expressing strong opinions, posting inflammatory content, or violating hate/harassment laws. Sometimes arrests lead to convictions; other times, they result in cautions, fines, or release. Critics argue that such laws are vague, risk chilling free speech, and might be applied inconsistently.
Several examples:
The Trump Organization claims that Capital One closed hundreds of its accounts after January 6, 2021, as political retribution.
Republican state attorneys general have accused JPMorgan Chase of discriminating against customers by closing accounts of organizations with certain political or religious views.
In another instance, many U.S. banks froze unemployment benefit debit cards or frozen accounts of people receiving unemployment payments, citing fraud concerns. Some people were legitimately collecting benefits but had their accounts locked by automated fraud filters.
These stories raise alarm for many: if a bank decides (or is pressured) to close or freeze accounts based on beliefs, affiliations, or vague “risk” criteria—rather than hard evidence of wrongdoing—then access to financial services becomes a tool of control.
Digital IDs: pros and cons
Digital identity systems — IDs — are being proposed or deployed in many places. Their potential benefits and drawbacks include:
Pros:
Financial inclusion. Many people who lack formal identity documents can’t open bank accounts or access financial services. E-ID can lower barriers. (India’s Aadhaar is a good example.)
Efficiency, reduced fraud. Easier verification, less paperwork, more secure transactions, and possibly fewer identity fraud problems.
Convenience: smoother access to public services, payments, etc.
Cons:
Privacy risks/surveillance. Digital ID systems often require the collection and centralization of sensitive personal data. That gives authorities (or private firms) power to track many aspects of life.
Mistakes, misuse, exclusion. If the ID system is flawed, biased, or used for enforcement, people may be wrongly denied services, blocked, or improperly punished.
Centralization of power. If identity systems are controlled by the government or a few large corporations, this can concentrate power in ways that threaten individual autonomy.
Digital divide. Not everyone has access to the required technology, a stable internet connection, devices, etc. Some may be left behind or forced to use less secure workarounds.
A social credit system usually involves combining many data points (financial history, legal/social behavior, sometimes even online activity or “virtues”) to produce a “score” or rating. In China, the system has real consequences: travel permissions, access to certain hotels, and sometimes restrictions if the score is low.
In the U.S. and many other Western democracies, there is no official social credit score system in that sense—but there are creeping trends:
More use of “alternative data” (online behavior, purchase history, non-traditional credit metrics) in lending and credit scoring.
Banks are closing or freezing accounts, sometimes citing risk, fraud, or political or religious affiliation (even if officially denied). Some see that as a form of financial censorship or control.
When people talk about the “American Way,” they usually mean things like: political freedom, free speech, private property, ability to engage in commerce and banking freely, rule of law, limited government intrusion, etc. Social credit, digital ID, and bank account control can conflict with these ideals. Here are the potential adverse effects, and some counter-arguments.
Negative effects:
Reduction of free markets. If access to banking, loans, or payment systems depends on political or social conformity (speech, beliefs, behavior), then economic opportunity is no longer based purely on merit, creditworthiness, or consent. That undermines fairness and competition.
Chilling effect on free expression. If people fear their speech (even private or online speech) may lead to losing access to bank services or being blacklisted, they may self-censor. That affects public discourse and democracy.
Central power & arbitrary enforcement. When centralized systems hold power over identity, finance, and speech, there’s a risk of misuse—biases, errors, discrimination, and abuse of power.
Erosion of privacy and autonomy. Consumer data (social media, spending, movements) can be used to score or judge individuals. That weakens the boundary between public and private life.
Inequality and exclusion. Those without the correct digital ID, with lower-tech access, or with “bad” histories (or even false allegations) may be excluded from economic participation.
Counter-arguments / possible positives:
Efficiency, anti-fraud, risk control. Banks need to manage risk. Fraud, money laundering, and terror financing are genuine threats. Using more data and stricter identity verification may reduce those risks, which protects the economy and consumers.
Better targeting of services/subsidies. Digital ID and scoring can help governments or NGOs direct help to those who need it, reduce waste, and avoid fraud.
Inclusion through technology. Some people who were excluded due to a lack of traditional forms of ID can gain access via e-ID or alternative credit scoring.
Consumer choice/regulation. With robust legal protections, transparency, and oversight, many risks can be mitigated.
Yes, they can threaten foundational aspects of capitalism and American values — free speech, fair markets, property rights — especially if left unchecked. But whether they will depends on how they are implemented, what safeguards are in place, and how much public resistance or legal constraints are at play.
If laws and institutions allow banks or governments to cut off people arbitrarily for speech or political affiliation, that is deeply troubling.
If digital ID becomes a “must-have” for full participation in society, with no alternatives, it becomes coercive.
Social credit scoring in its extreme is antithetical to classical liberal capitalism, which values individual freedom, risk-taking, and competition, not conformity or surveillance.
On the other hand, capitalism has continually evolved: risk assessment (credit scoring), reputation systems (reviews), identity verification (photo IDs), etc., are part of its functioning. The key is to ensure transparency, due process, legal protection, and decentralization—to prevent power from becoming overly concentrated and to ensure that individuals retain agency.
Practical Steps to take right NOW!
1. Diversify Your Financial Access
Keep multiple banking relationships — if one institution closes your account, you still have alternatives.
Maintain some physical assets (cash, precious metals, or other stores of value) outside the digital system.
Consider credit unions or community banks, which often have stronger local accountability and fewer political pressures.
2. Reduce Data Exposure
Minimize the personal data you share online and with financial apps; many “free” services monetize your behavior for profiling.
Use privacy-focused browsers, VPNs, and encryption tools for sensitive communications.
Opt out of data brokers when possible; several allow you to remove your information.
3. Strengthen Digital Autonomy
Learn and use self-custody financial tools (e.g., hardware wallets for cryptocurrency, secure password managers).
Back up essential documents offline or in secure, private storage—not just in cloud systems that can be locked or censored.
Support open-source and decentralized technologies that reduce single points of control.
4. Stay Financially Informed and Legally Aware
Follow legislative changes around digital ID, CBDCs (central bank digital currencies), and data privacy laws.
Support or join free speech and digital rights organizations that advocate for financial freedom and privacy.
Maintain good financial health—strong credit, savings, and clean compliance history—so you’re less vulnerable to arbitrary targeting.
5. Build Community and Redundancy
Develop trusted local networks—community trade, small-business cooperatives, peer-to-peer payment systems.
Participate in civic discussions to shape digital policy before systems are imposed from above.
Remember: resilience grows from decentralization—the more options you control directly, the less one system can define your worth.
Social Credit Scoring: What is it? Could it come here?