Dear Olympics Media: Please Spare Us Your Fawning Over China's Digital Surveillance
Regarding the authoritarian country's central bank digital currency, you do not, under any circumstances, “gotta hand it to them.”

The Olympics are here again! So soon? It's not your imagination: the 2020 games in Japan wrapped up in 2021 due to COVID postponement. And speaking of COVID, the 2022 games are in China. The Chinese Communist Party is certainly hoping to spiff up their image after these bruising past two years, and I don't just mean through the impressive spectacles during the festivities itself.
The CCP wants to dazzle the world with its sparkling digital panopticons, the crown jewel being its "central bank digital currency," or CBDC. China's government-controlled digital yuan, also called e-CNY, has been in the making for several years and will be "premiering globally" during the Olympics. The CCP is hoping that foreign journalists will marvel at the efficiency and speed of such a centralized payment system. Unfortunately, I expect much of the Western press to gobble it up.
It started happening well before the opening ceremony. One glowing preview in Fortune talks about how the digital yuan will "broaden financial inclusion and promote equitable growth." The author uncritically repeats the People's Bank of China's (PBOC) arguments that the government will be a better steward of user data than popular private payment apps WeChat Pay and Alipay. Without skipping a beat, he goes on to write that PBOC will collect "real-time data on the creation, bookkeeping, and circulation of money" to better help "set monetary policy." The conclusion: the digital yuan should "become a model" for other countries.
Well, before a worldwide spread, the digital yuan should probably successfully become a model for China itself. Despite all the pomp and coverage, China's CBDC isn't actually that popular among Chinese citizens. The government has been rolling out test programs on select cities like Shenzhen (a tech hub) and Chengdu since 2020. China expanded the pilots in a handful of other mysterious cities—the Atlantic Council could only identify 13 of the 28 total—throughout the past two years.
But for whatever reason, the Chinese just aren't that into the digital yuan. Official PBOC figures estimate that some $13.68 billion in transactions have occurred since e-CNY debuted two years ago. That's chicken feed in China. For comparison, Alipay alone handles some $1.5 trillion in payments on average each month.
Chinese consumers are famously cool with digital payments. They more or less decided to go cashless on their own. Around 90 percent of all Chinese transactions are routed through WeChat Pay or Alipay. It's just easier—scan a code, push a button, end of transaction. Throw in how essential an app like WeChat is for daily Chinese life and it's easy to see how digital payments have become so ingrained in China.
The CCP must have thought it would be easy to convince Chinese consumers to switch over to their patriotic alternative. Good on citizens for ignoring it. Say what you will about the close party connections of the centralized all-inclusive data repositories that are Alipay and WeChat Pay, at least these companies are not literally the government.
Actually, China has been undergoing its own "war on big tech" for some time. Although many in the West view Chinese companies as de facto extensions of the Chinese state, the CCP has been cracking down on tech giants like Alibaba and Tencent, who respectively own Alipay and WeChat. As evidenced by the PBOC's negative comments about the payment giants' data practices, the CCP sees the digital yuan at least partly as a way to wrest control from private tech companies.
So now we come to the Olympics and the Chinese CBDC's big international debut. Maybe some global googly eyes can inspire some new enthusiasm for the government's dud of a digital currency.
Athletes and staff in the Olympic Village will have just three options to make payments: cash, Visa, and the digital yuan. To use e-CNY, visitors can use a kiosk to convert their local currency into the digital yuan which is then loaded on a debit card. Then you just use the card like any other. The PBOC wants to sweeten up the deal a bit, so they've made wearables like smart watches, ski gloves, and Olympic pins that can be loaded with the currency and scanned to make payments.
Alas, China has been a bit hoisted by its own petard. COVID-19 isolation rules are pouring cold water on the country's plans for a big digital yuan splash. Limiting the number of fans who can attend the games necessarily limits the number of people who can be exposed to the hottest innovations in Chinese spyware.
And it's not like the American government is unaware of the intentions here. Officials have warned athletes not to use the digital yuan because of the surveillance risk. The U.S. Olympic and Paralympic Committee has urged Team USA to just ditch their phones altogether and bring a burner instead. It's not bad advice. (The "bad advice" title goes to Rep. Nancy Pelosi's confusing exhortation for athletes to condemn Chinese human rights abuses while not making the CCP mad.)
When it comes to China, many in the West feel these kinds of government expansions "can't happen here." Well, CBDCs are hardly a Chinese phenomenon. Most governments in the West are considering or actively developing their own digital currencies to impose on the population. Just last week, the Boston Fed put out an exploratory paper on their "Project Hamilton" to develop a "high-performance and resilient transaction processor for a CBDC." China's CBDC started with an exploratory paper, too.
If you want a fast, reliable, secure, borderless global payment system, we already have bitcoin. If you want it to be private, too, there are ways to do that (or you can use Monero). There is no need for the government to get involved. Unless you support the government—then you want them to have all the power they want.
Keep this in mind if you see any Olympics journalists fawning over China's digital yuan. It's not the efficiency that impresses them—plenty of cryptocurrencies do that. It's the state control.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
What's the difference between the Olympics and a Chinese citizen?
Nobody's watching the Olympics.
I like it. Gonna steal it.
Nice
/thread
Excellent
Ooooh, that's good.
China is asshoe.
Wasist
Fuck the Genocide Games.
And fuck NBC and all the advertisers who support it. I look at the commercials as a target list of companies NOT to do business with, since they kiss the Dragon's Ass.
And fuck Joe Biden.
Fuck Joe Biden
Fuck Joe Biden
Double possum fuck Joe and his Ho.
With a fucking spiky pineapple.
Abide Joe Fucken!
Dear progressive media, spare us over your fawning of the human stories that focus on protected classes. The LGBTQ+ stories And maybe spend some time giving proper treatment to Olympic hero Richard Jewell.
Not watching the Olympics has really done a good job getting me psyched up to not watch the Superbowl.
Olympians should later compete in a singing competition:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=3kU9XwcOIfI
And with all the money not spent on game day snacks, I can take my kids out for ice cream all week instead.
Much happier house.
It's been more of an abject party event, almost more of a poker (or Euchre or Mao) night, than a dedicated Superbowl watching event at our house for several years now.
Sad commentary, isn't it, that the U.S. Curling Association has more members than the Libertarian National Committee? Stones sliding on ice is more important to Americans than trying to fight back against erosion of individual liberties?
Guess American curlers take their liberty for granite.
They just brush it aside...
Hear about that new broom Americans are buying? It is sweeping the nation.
They won't know what they had until it slips away from them.
Jesus Christ! What are you- a boulder? A rock person? How long have you been saying that wrong?
You're right, it is a bit sad.
There are a few reasons for it, I think:
1. Libertarians have a bit of a reputation for being a bunch of either paranoid cranks, or Scrooge McDuck capitalist caricatures. Neither one is particularly helpful for attracting members.
2. The tired old problem of thinking that there are only "supposed" to be two parties, as if it's in the Constitution or something.
3. More importantly however, I think a lot of people have a more utilitarian approach to liberty than we do. They may be predisposed and receptive to the *idea* of liberty, but they make exceptions and rationalizations based on perceived "special cases". They are all in favor of liberty, except when there's a pandemic. Or when there's global climate change. Or when there's migrant caravans "flooding the borders". Or when there's "unfair trade" with China. Or any number of issues that people care about. So they are not inclined to sign up for a program in which they believe their own lives will be worse in those particular areas as a result. That is why I think Libertarians really need to speak to these issues in an adult way, and not just have platitudes. What would a Libertarian Party trade policy look like? What would a Libertarian Party immigration policy look like? What would a Libertarian Party climate change policy look like? It's gotta have specifics that prove we take these issues seriously, not just empty slogans. I would particularly love to see what a Libertarian Party public health policy would be. "Abolish the CDC" doesn't cut it. It has to speak to people who are legitimately fearful about the effects of pandemics, or climate change, or immigration, or whatever, and explain how a program of liberty will actually make things better. Once this happens, I think we stand a better chance.
Most people want "liberty for me, but not for thee", just as they want taxes for others and benefits for themselves. It's human nature.
A truly libertarian party would abolish about 75% of the current government, from HUD to CDC to Depts of Ed, Energy, Commerce and so on. ALL of these agencies, and many more, are merely there to satisfy some power grab and do NOT appear in the Constitution.
"Report: 98 Percent Of U.S. Commuters Favor Public Transportation For Others" -- Onion, 11/29/00
The Onion; remember when we could recognize parody, and not wonder if was headline news?
Whatever the result, it would be bad for you.
No more gov't nannies to wipe your ass and fat shaming would be a thing again.
That was mature.
You are font of endless irony.
It's more item #3 than anything, honestly. While people will state a preference for liberty, they very rarely support ideas that espouse liberty, or only in certain cases.
Most people align with Republicans or Democrats and embrace both their liberty and anti-liberty positions. You can see that pretty clearly in these very forums. It's clear that the current way of reaching people doesn't work. In my opinion it's because the majority of people who identify as libertarian-leaning don't really understand that it means supporting freedom to do things you don't like as much (or more) as those things you do like.
Want people to stop banning books in local libraries, etc? Then maybe you shouldn't be promoting the idea of speech as "hate speech" at all. (as an example)
"...Most people align with Republicans or Democrats and embrace both their liberty and anti-liberty positions..."
Quite a few people seem willfully ignorant of the difference between them.
The libertarian conundrum is that while most people want less government, they're also benefiting from government. So they want to cut this but not that. That's why cutting government is always a platitude without specifics. Specifics mean someone loses their job, their contract, or their transfer payment. It means someone's mom loses SS or Medicare. It means someone's cousin loses their cushy government job. It means someone gets laid off because their employer lost a government contract. That's why cuts in government spending are politically impossible. Once they get specific, a bunch of people will raise a big stink.
Yup. The only program a majority of voters agree on cutting is foreign aid, and it's about 1% of the budget. And even it never gets cut.
Chemjeff, lots of good food for thought for those active in the LP.
They have to move away from platitudes and "well here's what Jefferson said..." kind of arguments. Trouble is, those kind of discussions don't work well in a political setting with 30 sec. sound bites and lawn signs. And, if you've ever been to an LP Platform Committee meeting, you'd see how it is almost impossible to come up with any detailed plan for rolling back the state ....like trying to get 20 cats to go through the "eye of a needle."
There are a couple of problems with the LP. First of all being the No True Scotsman fallacy. The successful parties embrace anyone that will put their letter behind their name. The LP should move more towards that goal, within reason. Anybody willing to wear an L is most likely better than an R or D on a majority of issues. That says something.
If evangelical R's can rally behind someone like Trump or socialists can rally behind someone like Bill Clinton then surely we can agree that someone like Jo Jorgensen or Gary Johnson is worthy of wearing an L despite being "wrong" on a few issues.
Or we could vote for someone who has polices worthy of support regardless of the letter following their name.
Say, Trump, for example.
I aligned with something like 90% of Jo Jorgensen's policies and 55% of Trump's. I voted for the person that best aligns with my principles.
I also don't live in a swing state. My vote meant nothing.
The problem is if you try to build a mass market LP, you end up with middle-of-the-road types like Gary Johnson and Bill Weld, and pull 3% of the vote. And the hardcore activists sit it out.
And if you nominate a true believer, the news media says he or she doesn't have a chance, and they pull 0.5% of the vote again.
At the end of the day, libertarianism operates as a good default starting point for any public policy. But it itself is too extreme of an ideology to ever succeed. True libertarianism requires a utopic idea of humans in order to be successful. Ironically, libertarianism's fatal flaw is the same as socialism; it demands people act selflessly for the common good, one from an individual point of view, and one from a collectivist point of view. But neither can accomplish it because it is counter to human nature.
It's the other political parties that trust people with unlimited power. Libertarians are not the ones with utopian blinders.
"...Libertarians are not the ones with utopian blinders."
Not necessarily true. See Sarc, Brandyshit and several others who refuse to vote for anyone who doesn't have an L behind their name, regardless of their policies.
If that's not 'utopian blinders', it'll do just fine until something more so comes along.
And libertarians don't require anyone to act selflessly for the common good. They expect everyone to be the best judge of his or her own interests, and to pursue them freely (so long as they don't violate the rights of others to do the same), and for the integral of the individual choices and actions to be the revealed preference of the true "common good", rather than some lofty ideal someone expresses in a power grab sort of way.
No, libertarianism requires utopic behavior from people. It demands individuals act appropriately and selflessly towards each other. It requires individuals to know limits and behave honorably. It discounts greed, backstabbing, lying, cheating, and gaming others.
A fully libertarian society would be a catastrophic failure as people require rules, laws, regulations, structure, and governance. You can't trust everyone to do the right thing all the time. And that's what pure libertarianism requires.
Not true. All we have to do is prohibit government from initiating force. That can be done with a 28th amendment, "Government shall not initiate force."
Curling is one of the few sports where players can enjoy a drink.
Apples and oranges.
The whole fucking world decided to go cashless on its own, years ago. It's called PayPal, or Visa, or Venmo, or Mastercard, or EFT, or youfuckingnameit.
Digital currency. Jeebus. Now, anonymous digital currency gets a conversation going. Unfortunately, that's the precise opposite of what every government wants and what every government is working on.
When individuals talk about digital currency, what they don't say is that anonymity is essential.
When governments talk about digital currency, what they don't say is that anonymity is impermissible. Fuck off, slavers.
Unfortunately, that's the precise opposite of what every government wants and what every government is working on.
If TANSTAAFL, nobody wants it. Giving away goods and labor with no idea or who's using them or how? Accepting 'no strings attached' payment from anonymous sources? Libertarians respect a right to privacy, not a right to make and keep others stupid. The fundamental notion behind crypto is an oxymoronic zero-information, self-guiding market/economy.
Is this sarcasm? I ask because a that's what cash does.
"The CCP is hoping that foreign journalists will marvel at the efficiency and speed of such a centralized payment system. Unfortunately, I expect much of the Western press to gobble it up."
What's not to like about CCP China for the average woke journalist? Government-directed society, amplified privilege for "approved" media, overall policies calling for communism but shiny consumer economy on the surface, institutionalized social status, crushing any undesirable voices, etc.
This. Communist China is exactly the utopia that western leftists are trying to impose on us.
^ this; for progressives it's a playbook.
I have that. It's called a Visa card.
I keep trying to care about the Olympics, but between subjecting myself to the propaganda efforts of China and all the human interest stories about the athletes that come across like a diversity compliance workshop given by the personnel department at a major corporation, I just can't get into it.
I love the picture of the Chinese tennis player who went missing and the Chinese agent who forgot to get out of the way of the mirror for the picture.
Sums up that country very well.
I saw that picture too; incredible.
Someone with meme production skills (not me):
Marry that photo of Peng Shuai, captioned with Moonrocks' joke at the top of these comments.
Get it up to the innerwebs stat. Guaranteed global viral.
I can't imagine letting that stuff bother me. It's like if you like watching football, who really cares what the politics of the person at QB are and whether he stands or sits for a National Anthem.
To each their own. I feel like I can watch the Olympics because I enjoy some of the events without fear of being brainwashed.
If you turn off the sound and watch the skiers and snowboarders zooming downhill it's not so bad.
It seems that economic engagement with China has done less to open their society lately than it has make our business culture more accepting of authoritarian demands.
WORD
Don’t forget our universities.
Summer of rioting for racial grievance 2020 brought to you by the same people that are currently fawning over the Chinese, bowing to them, and making bank from them.
So all that talk of needing to know the true extent of what slavery did to the black community and rehashing it endlessly, every day, rings a little hollow when there is active, open racism and slavery by the Chinese toward a minority population...today, right now. And all of the people pocketing the most money from the Chinese tend to be those pushing CRT and its praxis the hardest. So its really hard for me to continue to be asked to self flagellate for the sins of past whipipo when these grifters are making money on slavery without saying a peep, then turning around and telling me about my privelege.
They see the future as a Chicom style society with themselves at the top. Once the pesky old Constitution is either dissolved or neutered they can then deal with deplorables and insurrectionists on their own terms. All of the CRT etc bullshit is nothing but window dressing.
It's right up there with feminist progs supporting the Taliban against Jews.
It makes one sincerely doubt they even understand what they claim to stand for.
The CBDC being mostly ignored by Chinese could be a chink in their armor.
I wonder how far it will fall before they Yangtze currency off the market?
That's yellow journalism.
CBDC - 30 minutes after your spend it you want to buy something else.
That's a pretty slanted take.
One glowing preview in Fortune talks about how the digital yuan will "broaden financial inclusion and promote equitable growth."
Glad I let my subscription lapse years ago.
The words "inclusion" and "equity" [outside of what I own of my house] only manage to immediately divert my attention elsewhere.
It's bizarre how the American media operates. It's bizarre to the point of being creepy. What is the hiring process that so reliably results in writers for these platforms to spew this singular-minded set of platitudes in every possible venue they can. It's like the media has one Minister of Propaganda who sends out missives to every media outlet in the country, and all of these so-called journalists simply retype them and publish at their respective outlet.
no matter the form of payment there is never true equity and they will never allow for it since they depend on the phantom of inequity for their power. who needs rulers in a utopia
"...Glad I let my subscription lapse years ago."
I remember extremely good (skeptical) articles on Enron and Theranos. They weren't common, but they did show up.
And then they no longer did.
Got freebie issues from several years afterwards, but seems they finally figured they weren't gonna get a renewal. From what was in the freebies, they were worth what I was paying.
Ditto The Economist.
if you haven't read Mickey Rat's interesting piece, it's about six comments above this.
Enemies of the people.
" It's just easier—scan a code, push a button, end of transaction. "
Payment by mobile phone is extremely popular in China and within the past couple of years 'face payment' has been introduced and has tens of millions of registered users. KFC was apparently the first place to use it. Some stores no longer accept cash, payment by mobile phone is required.
Just so you know, anyone paying by VISA or Mastercard etc is being digitally surveilled.
If you own a smart phone you're being digitally surveilled.
If you are alive you are being surveilled
You're being surveiled!
...PBOC will collect "real-time data on the creation, bookkeeping, and circulation of money" to better help "set monetary policy."
Among other things.