Print this post Print this post

Your Browsing History Might Impact Your Credit Score

2,190 words

New World Order proposals tend to appear feel-good or sensible on the outside, then reveal themselves to be rotten upon closer inspection. The International Monetary Fund’s new big idea about personal credit scores is no exception.

The IMF, of course, is one of those big international institutions that the public didn’t elect yet wields tremendous influence in the world economy. As we were told by my high school civics teacher, the Goddess of the Status Quo, their function is to be an international currency trading house. Cool beans, but it seems that monkeying with personal credit scores exceeds their authority. What’s up with that one?

How credit scores are calculated now

As it goes in the USA, there are three credit bureaus: Experian, TransUnion, and Equifax. These collect data on payment history, as well as a few other metrics. (These items are among what the IMF terms as “hard information.”) The permission to keep dossiers on you is buried into the fine print of the credit agreements that hardly anybody reads. The bureaus all have a long-form report, but also produce a single FICO score that summarizes creditworthiness. 300 is the worst score, and 850 is the best. Bad scores will mean being rejected for loans, or having to pay Shylock interest rates. The exact formula is a trade secret, which seems a bit fishy, but the general details are known.

35% of the score is based on payment history. Being late on bills incurs a penalty, and charged-off accounts are worse. 30% depends on how much you owe; large credit card balances will bring a penalty. (That’s a bad idea in the first place, since you’re forking over high interest rates to the banksters every month.) 15% of the score is length of credit; new accounts bring this down. 10% is about types of credit in use; all credit cards and no installment loans are considered bad. The final 10% of the score is about recent inquiries; consumers get a small hit each time they apply. Other penalties are for collection actions, bankruptcy (the latter lasts ten years), and certain legal actions.

What’s the bad part of the system? The keyfield, of course, is the almighty Social Security Number. It only was supposed to be an identifier for a government retirement program. The politicians swore up and down that it never would be used as a universal identifier, but that’s exactly what happened. Moreover, the Privacy Penetrator Number is required in finance too. Just try getting a loan without one! The alternative is doing without, but most people don’t have enough cash on the barrelhead to buy a decent used car, and only the rich can buy a house without a mortgage. Loans may also be needed for education or to pay off large medical bills.

Other than that, late payments on regular consumer debt will haunt someone for up to seven years. These reports often are used in pre-employment screenings. So someone who desperately needs a job to pay late bills might not be able to get hired because of late bills. Effectively, this kicks people when they’re down. Also, those who don’t have any credit activity at all within the last seven years will have very low scores and will get stuck with Shylock interest rates until they can establish a good payment history.

Still, there are some good parts to the system. Once a year, someone can obtain a free report from each of the bureaus. Inaccurate information can be disputed. Also, this covers a limited selection of personal information — the items mentioned above. Financial institutions worried about getting sued for “racism” even can opt to leave out the names and addresses of applicants, lest they be accused of bias against people with highly creative monikers or who live in bad neighborhoods.

It’s very objective that way. In principle, even social class isn’t a barrier to a good rating, so long as payments are made regularly and one isn’t up to one’s nostrils in debt. Doctors, engineers, and archbishops will all get good credit scores if they pay their bills on time and live within their means. So will street sweepers, undocumented pharmacists, and ex-convicts, as long as they’re financially prudent. Ideology, religion, opinions, hobbies, and so forth don’t figure into it for better or worse. The data collection system simply doesn’t track these things. A women’s studies professor, a Boogaloo Battalion officer, a genderfractal transunicorn, and a Scientologist e-meter repairman will all get good scores if they pay their loans on time.

What the IMF wants to use for credit ratings

The blog post advocating new criteria appears in “What is Really New in Fintech.” (It’s based on an earlier IMF working paper which tends to be pretty dry, as such things usually are.) This modest proposal promises big changes:

Traditional banks face competition from online start-ups with no physical branches. Social media and other digital platforms are expanding into payments and credit. The increase in demand for digital services triggered by COVID-19 is turbo-charging this transformation.

Well, now, where have we heard this sort of thing before? Then it offers a solution to the aforementioned problem of finding it difficult to get credit if one doesn’t have any.

Fintech resolves the dilemma by tapping various nonfinancial data: the type of browser and hardware used to access the internet, the history of online searches and purchases. Recent research documents that, once powered by artificial intelligence and machine learning, these alternative data sources are often superior than traditional credit assessment methods, and can advance financial inclusion, by, for example, enabling more credit to informal workers and households and firms in rural areas.

Of course, there are certain risks and challenges. One of these is the following:

Other critical areas include competition policy, to address the monopolistic tendencies of large digital platforms, related to network effects and the natural tendency to converge to a few large platforms; and data policies to ensure consumer privacy and efficient and safe collection, processing, and exchange of data.

Oh, really? That’s about as far as it goes with that one. Then it wraps up with this:

Governments should follow and carefully support the technological transition in finance. It is important to adjust policies accordingly and stay ahead of the curve.

It looks like this is a clear recommendation then. One of the notable things about outfits like the IMF is that they can advise governments to do this or that, and politicians pay attention. It must be nice!

You can buy Greg Johnson’s Here’s the Thing here.

What’s in the working paper?

Here we have a few more hints as to how this plan might be carried out:

The use of non-financial data will have large effects on the provision of financial services. Traditionally, banks rely on the analysis of customer financial information from payment flows and accounting records. The rise of the internet permits the use of new types of nonfinancial customer data, such as browsing histories and online shopping behavior of individuals, or customer ratings for online vendors.

The literature suggests that such non-financial data are valuable for financial decision making. Berg et al. (2019) show that easy-to-collect information such as the so-called “digital footprint” (email provider, mobile carrier, operating system, etc.) performs as well as traditional credit scores in assessing borrower risk. Moreover, there are complementarities between financial and non-financial data: combining credit scores and digital footprint further improves loan default predictions. Accordingly, the incorporation of non-financial data can lead to significant efficiency gains in financial intermediation.

The last item suggests that ideally, one’s online “digital footprint” should supplement the “hard information” standards for creditworthiness. Still, I’m afraid that we’ve just begun to scratch the surface:

Large technology firms collect vast amounts of non-financial data through their consumer-facing platforms in the areas of e-commerce, social networking, and online search. The sheer amount of data enables the use of “big data” analysis tools such as artificial intelligence and machine learning.

I can’t wait for Skynet to become self-aware. Much further discussion follows about the decline of traditional banking and the possibilities for future conglomerations. For example:

The recently announced partnerships between Apple and Goldman Sachs as well as Google and Citigroup are consistent with this view, and most likely only mark the beginning of Bigtech platform involvement in financial services provision. [. . .] Not providing financial services directly also allows platforms to avoid compliance costs, and, especially in the case of Bigtech firms, political resistance.

How clever.

What possibly could go wrong?

The details are remarkably nebulous still. It says nothing further about what will be deemed good or bad for someone’s new, improved credit score. It does state that details will have to be hashed out still. Let’s take a crack at it and see how this might go. The “digital footprint” data listed as possible fair game to be scanned and analyzed for creditworthiness include these above-mentioned items in order of appearance:

  • The type of browser
  • Hardware used to access the internet
  • History of online searches
  • Browsing history
  • Purchases
  • Customer ratings for online vendors
  • Email provider
  • Mobile carrier
  • Operating system
  • Social networking

So if someone uses Brave or Tor (you rebel!) instead of Chrome, is that person’s credit rating penalized? Is a bugman who always buys the latest gadgets advantaged, and someone who keeps the ‘486 well-oiled disadvantaged? Are Windows 10 users better credit risks than Fedora users? Which cell phone providers give good credit ratings and which do not? Which email providers will incur a penalty? There are no answers given so far, but these criteria count in the proposed system. How is this stuff supposed to matter, anyway? Despite a couple of nods in passing to privacy concerns, even these technological details have crossed the line.

The invasion of privacy goes much further than that. Purchases will be a criterion too. One may surmise that lots of online purchases are good, and in the “New Normal,” this will disadvantage those who prefer to buy most things at stores. Will buying any particular types of goods and services incur penalties? Does leaving bad reviews cause someone to incur a bad credit rating? Are any of these things going to be disclosed? Again, we’re left to wonder.

Even that was merely the beginning. What web searches are not OK, in the opinion of whoever implements this? What happens if you go further and click the link to a site the programmers don’t like? What topics on social media will be penalized? All that’s going to be up to the artificial intelligence and machine learning the IMF’s working paper was discussing, and of course the criteria the programmers load into it. If the precise formula for FICO scores being a trade secret seems a little fishy, then the IMF plan’s vague details smell like a cask of Roman fishpickle bottled when Hadrian’s Wall was new.

Now I get political (you knew I would)

The IMF’s previously mentioned writings don’t make any particular statements about it, but this easily could be used as a system to enforce ideological control. Note well, these technologies — artificial intelligence and machine learning — are incorporated into the programs that Big Tech uses to identify thoughtcrime in posts and videos. What are the chances that people will be denied financial services for political reasons?

The precedents are already there. Online payment processors are notorious for this, and even a few traditional banks started doing this too. (Some of these payment platforms refuse to return money to customers who are treated this way, which is theft.) Often this will happen in quick succession, in conjunction with social media banning. Since that qualifies as an organized boycott, it’s illegal under the Sherman Antitrust Act. Simply put, Big Tech can’t be trusted to assign our credit scores or otherwise interfere in the public’s finances.

All told, converging banking functions with Big Tech isn’t so wonderful after all. The further possibilities are worse than that. Since more online shopping and the “cashless society” are big agendas being pushed in the Great Reset package, this is likely to make it further difficult for people to buy basic necessities if they’ve been caught browsing the “wrong” websites or whatever. One final question: will it be possible to opt out of such a system, or will refusal to accept the terms make it impossible to buy anything, just as one can’t get a loan without handing over one’s Soviet Security Number?

Whatever intentions the IMF has or doesn’t have, this proposal means a massive invasion of privacy. Worse, it has the potential to be just as bad as the Chinese “social credit” system rightly regarded as a police state measure. We need to call attention to this and expose it before it gets started.

If you want to support Counter-Currents, please send us a donation by going to our Entropy page and selecting “send paid chat.” Entropy allows you to donate any amount from $3 and up. All comments will be read and discussed in the next episode of Counter-Currents Radio, which airs every weekend on DLive.

Don’t forget to sign up for the twice-monthly email Counter-Currents Newsletter for exclusive content, offers, and news.



  1. Vagrant Rightist
    Posted January 7, 2021 at 12:22 am | Permalink

    Power has a natural tendency to coalesce into one ungodly dehumanizing blob. We have seen this accelerate dramatically in the last 20 years with technology. And power demands ever more power to stay powerful. It wants to insert itself into more layers, to find ever more obnoxious and crushing ways of ruling and managing.

    The proposition of using online history to inform financial status is a massive evil in itself and should never be something of serious consideration.

    Yet we are only hearing about it now because the covid situation has created an atmosphere of fear where the public are being asked to give up certain norms for some higher purpose. This atmosphere is extremely reminiscent to me of what happened after 9/11 where too many people appeared alarmingly more open to giving up their rights. At the same time there was an explosion of the security-industrial-complex and a massive push for more biometrics, snooping and so on. Power sees this as its opportunity. So we are hearing about this stuff now and the Great Reset and the idea of forcing vaccinations so on. This is power testing the waters when vast swathes of the public are at their most compliant.

    This reminds me of something I agree with that Chomsky said about NSA/MI6/whatever Gov snooping, “It’s not to protect you from terrorists, it’s protect them (governments) from you”.

    In this case its not a government but as the article says, one of those “big international institutions that the public didn’t elect yet wields tremendous influence”.

    The question here about this proposal is would it turn into outright political oppression ? The answer is yes if we look to the track record.

    It’s not ‘if’, it’s when. The slippery slope is never a fallacy in these cases, it’s a model that predicts with pinpoint accuracy.

    Sure it will be sold back to the bugman as ‘improving your experience’ , ‘opening up choice’ and ‘giving you back financial freedom’ and so on, and the bugman will go along with it so he can continue purchasing crap on amazon and watching netflix and so he can take out a loan in the future. But this is why we have to control the bugman. The bugman has no mind or integrity of his own and must be shaped by higher forces.

    And yet in this hellscape being proposed at first it will only affect the bugman. It’s trivial to clear a browser of history, or even stuff it with false history about what you have been looking at on the internet. It would be easy for programmers to write a script that could do it for you, to make it look like you’re only looking at anti-racist, pro-globalist material.

    But the truth is no one should have to go to these lengths. These things would never be on the table of ideas in a healthy world to begin with, but we don’t live in a healthy world.

    • Posted January 7, 2021 at 12:06 pm | Permalink

      Well said.

      The only point that I’ll differ from is that clearing browser history won’t do anything. Activity is going to be tracked by ISPs and search engines. They already do that, mandated by law for ISPs.

      • Vagrant Rightist
        Posted January 7, 2021 at 10:27 pm | Permalink

        Ok right, I just assumed it was going to be another cookie or other tracking tech. Even if they get hard data from ISPs there will still be ways round it for dissidents, although I think by far the more important thing is to stop it being implemented at all.

      • Lord Shang
        Posted January 8, 2021 at 2:54 pm | Permalink

        Please elaborate:

        “The only point that I’ll differ from is that clearing browser history won’t do anything. Activity is going to be tracked by ISPs and search engines. They already do that, mandated by law for ISPs.”

        Who already does what? And what is “mandated by law for ISPs”?

        • Posted January 12, 2021 at 5:43 am | Permalink

          To be a little more specific, Internet service providers are legally mandated to log web traffic of their users (specifically, what sites people visit). This data probably goes to the Utah Data Center (along with recordings of phone calls and many other records). This flagrantly violates the Fourth Amendment, but that’s been lawyered around in court.

          As for search engines, many (perhaps most) keep records on user searches. That’s generally used for targeted advertising. Anyway, I hope that clears it up better.

  2. Flel
    Posted January 7, 2021 at 7:38 am | Permalink

    A big problem with this movement is getting away from cash. The banks have been pushing back hard against cash businesses. Tracking and reporting large deposits. Working with local government to pressure cash businesses to close. And what about identity fraud? I have suffered through multiple cases of aliens stealing my SSN. This won’t end up well I fear.

  3. Alexandra O.
    Posted January 7, 2021 at 9:42 am | Permalink

    I wonder what sort of score BLM and Antifa will get? Oh, well, they already have Soros to pay their bills. We need such a sugar daddy.

    Seriously, get a job, get two jobs, and save at least 10% of everything you earn, even tips and birthday checks. If you can afford college, major, or minor at least, in finance. The only way to beat the system is to know how it works in detail. If you’re not in the league to afford college, read everything you can about the stock market and finance, and attend those scruffy seminars put on by financial blowhards –“How to get Rich by Noon”! You know the types. But go there to learn, but don’t buy their ‘package deal’. Also, community colleges have night courses. and online course. We live in a world where money is king and you can’t fight that system. Just go along to get along, and save a bundle for your own safety. Get rich slowly and stay rich — no Big Deals.

  4. flagrant
    Posted January 7, 2021 at 12:32 pm | Permalink

    Use a vpn that is not located in 5/9/14 “eyes” countries.

    problem solved.

    • really?
      Posted January 7, 2021 at 1:31 pm | Permalink

      is it really that simple?

      • Middle Class Twit
        Posted January 8, 2021 at 1:35 am | Permalink

        Probably not. As far I know, using a VPN makes it very hard for third parties to identify you, but does not interfere with your ISP recording your searches.

        • Vagrant Rightist
          Posted January 8, 2021 at 7:48 am | Permalink

          Unless there’s something I’ve misunderstood, I think there is a little bit of confusion here. Putting aside NSA/5 Eyes stuff for a moment, right now even with an entity as shitty as Google, your ISP would not be able to see what you’re searching as a matter of course.

          That’s whole point of https to encrypt these connections, something Google themselves heavily encouraged the internet to adopt at the time. The ISP would see you went to but they would not be able to see what you are searching for. However that’s assuming no collusion between google and other actors like an ISP, but that’s the idea of https.

          With a VPN or similar service, your entire internet connection is encrypted between your computer and the server. Your ISP should not be able to see that you’re even using in this scenario (assuming everything is configured properly).

          • Middle Class Twit
            Posted January 8, 2021 at 1:52 pm | Permalink

            In that case, things are better than I thought! Which is a pleasant change.

          • Lord Shang
            Posted January 8, 2021 at 2:49 pm | Permalink

            Could you explain this some more? Maybe even write a post here along the lines of How To Maximally Preserve Your Online Search Privacy?

            As you say, without getting into NSA/FBI/CIA stuff, I have always wondered this:

            1. Is someone tracking all online comments, like yours and mine? Could they?

            2. ARE ALL YOUR ONLINE SEARCHES AND SITE VISITS BEING RECORDED SOMEWHERE? This would be trillions or more just for Americans.

            I did not really understand Beau’s article (I only skimmed it for the moment). I have always known never to do any dissident searches or access any such sites using a computer not my own (eg, a work one), nor even to do anything using my phone but their network.

            3. But are you and others saying that someone, other than super-sophisticated espionage agencies (which can do about anything), can track every time we have ever posted here at CC back to our ISPs (and thus obtain real identities)????

            4. Do you recommend that all Dissidents start using VPNs? If so, which one and what level of service?

            5. And what else can we do to ensure maximum online privacy? I have never used Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Parler, etc, nor will I, due to lack of interest. But I always assumed anonymous online posting (and certainly searching!~!!!) was safe and untraceable (except theoretically by very sophisticated law enforcement pursuing real, not “thought”, criminals).

            Thank you very much for your or others’ responses. Please elaborate as much as possible, more on technical defenses than political aspects, which are understood (we live in a modified version of USSR or China, I get that already: “totalitarian anarcho-tyranny” it might be called). Any online security advice sites or books people recommend would be appreciated, too.

            • Posted January 12, 2021 at 6:02 am | Permalink

              Here are some resources to get started:


              The absolute safest method, so I’ve heard, would be the following:
              — Buy a used laptop
              — Install a bootable Tails image on a USB stick. This is a Linux kernel with a copy of Tor, a dark web browser.
              — Visit a store with an Internet hotspot, then boot Tails, logon to their wifi, and browse anything you like
              — DO NOT check your email or social media or bank balance when you do this. The exception is if you’ve created an email account or social media account while anonymous this way, and it contains no personally identifying information, and you only check it from your secure laptop.

              An interim solution is to go to a library and use a public computer.

              • Lord Shang
                Posted January 17, 2021 at 1:38 am | Permalink

                Thanks Beau for taking the time to provide this info, although I still have a long way to go just to interpret your advice. I’ve accessed CC and similar sites hundreds of times from my home computer (eg, now), so for some of what you advise to be relevant I would have to figure out how to erase my digital footprint, if possible. But tens of millions of people must be in a similar position.

                Anyway, what do you think of a VPN? Do you employ one? Have you always over the years you’ve been writing online? And what do you think of, eg, Express VPN’s advice re “erasing one’s digital footprint”? Is it valid (possible)? Do you know what the best way is to erase one’s ISP records (again, past digital footprint) of past searches?

                And on using a public library to browse CC: besides being a huge pain in the ass, at least in my city one cannot use library computers without first having a library card, which requires some kind of “valid ID”. I never would check out CC on a library computer in my city.

                I honestly think some techie here should do a major post on “Here’s what we want our readers to do to protect their complete online anonymity”, with step by step instructions and other relevant suggestions. I think that would be a very popular and appreciated post.

Post a Comment

Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  • Our Titles

    White Identity Politics

    Here’s the Thing

    Trevor Lynch: Part Four of the Trilogy

    Graduate School with Heidegger

    It’s Okay to Be White


    The Enemy of Europe

    The World in Flames

    The White Nationalist Manifesto

    From Plato to Postmodernism

    The Gizmo

    Return of the Son of Trevor Lynch's CENSORED Guide to the Movies

    Toward a New Nationalism

    The Smut Book

    The Alternative Right

    My Nationalist Pony

    Dark Right: Batman Viewed From the Right

    The Philatelist

    Novel Folklore

    Confessions of an Anti-Feminist

    East and West

    Though We Be Dead, Yet Our Day Will Come

    White Like You

    The Homo and the Negro, Second Edition

    Numinous Machines

    Venus and Her Thugs


    North American New Right, vol. 2

    You Asked For It

    More Artists of the Right

    Extremists: Studies in Metapolitics


    The Importance of James Bond

    In Defense of Prejudice

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater (2nd ed.)

    The Hypocrisies of Heaven

    Waking Up from the American Dream

    Green Nazis in Space!

    Truth, Justice, and a Nice White Country

    Heidegger in Chicago

    The End of an Era

    Sexual Utopia in Power

    What is a Rune? & Other Essays

    Son of Trevor Lynch's White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    The Lightning & the Sun

    The Eldritch Evola

    Western Civilization Bites Back

    New Right vs. Old Right

    Lost Violent Souls

    Journey Late at Night: Poems and Translations

    The Non-Hindu Indians & Indian Unity

    Baader Meinhof ceramic pistol, Charles Kraaft 2013

    Jonathan Bowden as Dirty Harry

    The Lost Philosopher, Second Expanded Edition

    Trevor Lynch's A White Nationalist Guide to the Movies

    And Time Rolls On

    The Homo & the Negro

    Artists of the Right

    North American New Right, Vol. 1

    Some Thoughts on Hitler

    Tikkun Olam and Other Poems

    Under the Nihil

    Summoning the Gods

    Hold Back This Day

    The Columbine Pilgrim

    Confessions of a Reluctant Hater

    Taking Our Own Side

    Toward the White Republic

    Distributed Titles


    The Node

    The New Austerities

    Morning Crafts

    The Passing of a Profit & Other Forgotten Stories

    Gold in the Furnace