It’s no different from a driving test which measures you ability to drive and only affects your eligibility to drive.
We use such specialised tests with clear “passing” conditions that only affect a specific part of our lives all the time.
Social credit systems seem far more far reaching from what I have heard - affects your ability to get loans, buy property, travel, … etc. Your score also depends on pleasing certain people in society rather meeting some objective criteria - reminds me of the Black Mirror episode “Nosedive”.
Don’t think they are really comparable.
Not in the US. It also affects your ability to get housing, to get jobs, and other things.
> Landlords generally look for a credit score of 650 or above to approve a rental application.[1]
[0]https://www.cnbc.com/select/can-employers-see-your-credit-sc...
[1]https://www.apartmentlist.com/renter-life/credit-score-neede...
This is the way the media covered it, but PolyMatter recently did a video that goes a long way toward clarifying what Social Credit means [0]. The short version is that it's a collection of barely-related initiatives and companies responsible for a lot of different things, that in Western eyes all got lumped together into a monolothic version that encompasses every aspect of life.
PolyMatter has a lot of good content on China. They're highly critical of China's policies, but they have a very realistic perspective on China's quite limited capabilities as an enormous, diverse, authoritarian state. My main takeaway from their China content is that China's ability to micromanage is dramatically overestimated in Western pop culture. Not that their regime is less oppressive than we think, just vastly less competent.
That being said, I also think you're not accurately describing social credit or relying entirely on hearsay. For the most part its focused around credit worthiness and financial fraud. I'm not a huge fan of either system, but as somebody who's worked with people harmed by the US private credit system, I can tell you that it's possible to "Nosedive" here and that's not just what I've heard.
Welding doors of apartments where a few people test positive for COVID? Housing a male of the ethnic majority in a minority family and forcing the minority women to sleep with the men while their husbands are in Concentrtion camps? Organ harvesting of political prisoners?
I don't think the US does "privatized" versions of these things.
I did not say that every feature of society is perfectly replicated, nor have I studied both of them well enough to know if they are perfectly analogous. I'm sure some societies showcase their own idiosyncratic injustices. For instance, I'm not aware of for-profit prisons in China.
What charges on similar scales and severity would these harassed Chinese be accused of?
The US will harass you, but publicly and legally. If you're a media person, you won't get access to the money-making Americans corps. They'll cancel your visa, and harass anyone with your namesake at a border crossing.
The harassment from the CCP is continuous and affects a large number of people. Just because 1 side does bad things, doesn't mean they can't moralize the bigger culprit.
( I do find comments on the morals of war to be a bit rich coming from Americans)
"According to former intelligence officials, in the wake of the Vault 7 leaks, the CIA talked about kidnapping Assange from Ecuador's London embassy, and some senior officials discussed his potential assassination."
Over 600 assassination attempts against Fidel Castro alone for the crime of not kowtowing to all US demands (Fidel originally tried to ally with US not the Soviet Union, but was rebuffed by the US because redistributing foreign owned/stolen land was central to Fidel's central policy of lifting ordinary Cuban's out of poverty); also, since the Spanish-American war, the US viewed Cuba as something of a colony, and was unwilling to treat it as a peer.
More apropos, the US also kept "accidentally" bombing Al Jazeera newsrooms during the US unprovoked war of aggression in Iraq. Coincidentally, Al Jazeera were some of the only reporters who went independently into the field to report on US war crimes. The US was given the coordinates of the Al Jazeera Offices, so the US knew what they were bombing (each of multiple times).
I was subjected to the same bullshit K-12 hero worship "history" lessons and other US propaganda as I suspect you were/are. As a child we moved to a country where the US overthrew the democratically elected government and installed a far-right brutal murderous dictatorship (in support of a US corporation's rape of the country). This led to civil war (which I experienced first-hand; the US providing support to the oppressive government regime during the decades long war). We moved back to the US before the genocide began (the US providing support; Ronald Regan even personally meeting with the General primarily responsible for executing the genocide). This experience forced me to confront the lies we are told in the US.
Do what you want, but I'd suggest reading university level historical accounts (even those published in the US), they are much more accurate with far less/no hero worship. Also, listening/reading to foreign news sources is useful to help break through the propaganda our corporate news sources feed us here. The process is similar to being de-programmed from a cult, and the ultra patriots chanting, "USA, USA, USA..." have drank the Kool-Aid.
Good luck!
A better example would have been like dole wars, or maybe tacit support of pinochet but that's kinda dated and the US is definitely trending towards less of that shit.
If china's like "well the US did it so it should be ok for us", the correct response is: yeah, so? Be better.
But that is the purpose of that accusation - to inhibit self-defense through demoralization. Arguing that no, you're virtuous enough to deserve safety, is already falling into that trap. They're not coming to exact a just punishment.