A Digital First Dystopia

Digital first is a policy initiative in which the government prioritises and even coerces the use of digital infrastructure over paper and non-digital methods. Although the stated goal is modernisation, in reality it is a precursor to mandatory digital ID and social credit scores.

A digital first society poses a significant risk to civil liberties due to the centralised nature of data. It creates a system in which disenfranchisement can occur with the single click of a button, with a person or group deprived of the ability to rent, travel, buy and sell property, do business, use telecommunications and the internet, and even access basic needs.

This can already be observed in China, which has a network of digital and real-world surveillance that determines whether a person can access certain benefits or activities based on a social credit score. The mostly digital nature of Chinese society makes the system very difficult to evade.

Digital first systems incorporate significant amounts of personal data and allow for a level of mass surveillance that wasn’t possible in the past. Data can be utilised by corporations and government to build profiles on individuals that affect the way they are treated. This is especially relevant when governments implement polices such as predictive policing, which criminalises those who have committed no crime based on invasive data driven predictions.

Digital first policies prioritise the use of digital payments while discouraging and even stigmatising the use of cash. Many jurisdictions already subject cash-based or cash dominant businesses to a higher level of scrutiny. This creates a society in which those who prefer cash or are unable to access banking services can find themselves unable to access certain services and even essential goods.

This includes those fleeing abusive and domestic violence situations, low-income individuals who struggle to afford bank fees, those who are homeless, and even those who have been legally excluded from certain digital based services.

This is especially relevant with the rise of debanking based on political criteria and the ever-increasing KYC (know your customer) requirements, which encourage surveillance and the pre-emptive debanking and freezing of accounts of those who fail to comply. Banks increasingly cite KYC and corporate social responsibility obligations as a cover for politically motivated and malicious debanking.

There are recent examples of the banking system being weaponised by governments against individuals and groups for political reasons. In the 2022 Canadian Trucker Convoy even those who donated to peaceful protests found themselves with frozen bank accounts. In practice, debanking becomes a weapon which the government uses to silence dissent and punish people for things it doesn’t like.

Those who struggle to use or are unable to utilise certain technologies become de facto second-class citizens. In practice a digital first society requires people to pay to access the infrastructure including buying a computer or a phone, along with internet or a phone plan. Those who live in rural and outback areas can struggle with connectivity regardless of the ability to pay.

A digital first society also faces significant security issues. Digital payment structures can become non-functional during natural disasters and during cyber-attacks. Hackers recently deleted the entirety of Romania’s land registry, for example, which crippled its real estate market. The nation is currently in the process of trying to replicate it from non-digital back-ups.

A digital first society sets up a digital ecosystem which governments can use to mandate and coerce digital ID. Mandatory digital ID combined with a digital first policy creates significant problems in terms of freedom, privacy and security, including data leaks, loss of anonymity on the internet, and the need to hand over an unlocked phone to police and random strangers to prove identity.

As civil participation becomes increasingly digital, many governments have implemented invasive and repressive internet policies including online and operating system identity verification and chat control to manage access to online spaces and speech. If offline modes of communication are further neglected, we may very well become a society in which our ability to communicate and organise with others is dependent on permission from governments and corporations.

Governments are also resorting to measures such as internet blackouts to suppress protests and political movements. This has become standard practice in Iran, and India recently implemented an internet blackout to curb recent student protests.

This also has the effect of disrupting local digital payment infrastructure, meaning no one could pay with a card and businesses cannot make money. This demonstrates the importance of cash, which is resistant to restrictions on digital infrastructure.

To protect civil liberties and to prevent the further centralisation of government power, governments should adopt a policy of digital neutrality in which citizens and businesses have the right to decide whether they conduct their lives through digital and non-digital means. We must ensure the right to paper, the right to conduct business in cash, and freedom of choice.

Digital systems should be an option, not a mandate.