Former Clinton Adviser: Mandatory Vaccine Passport Could Lead to ‘End of Human Liberty in the West’ – by Jack Phillips March 29, 2021
Former Clinton adviser Naomi Wolf said that mandatory COVID-19 vaccine passports that have been proposed in recent days would be the “end of human liberty in the West if this plan unfolds as planned.”
“‘Vaccine passport’ sounds like a fine thing if you don’t understand what those platforms can do. I’m [the] CEO of a tech company, I understand what this platform does,” Wolf, who’s also an author,told Fox News on March 28. “It is not about the vaccine, it’s not about the virus, it’s about your data. Once this rolls out, you don’t have a choice about being part of the system. What people have to understand is that any other functionality can be loaded onto that platform with no problem at all.”
Wolf said such data can be “merged with your Paypal account, with your digital currency,” adding that “Microsoft is already talking about merging it with payment plans.”
Wolf noted that it happened in Israel, “and six months later, we’re hearing from activists that it’s a two-tiered society and that basically, activists are ostracized and surveilled continually. It is the end of civil society, and they are trying to roll it out around the world.”
“It is absolutely so much more than a vaccine pass, it is — I can not stress enough that it has the power to turn off your life, or to turn on your life, to let you engage in society or be marginalized.”
Going a step further, Wolf likened such plans to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surveillance of its population and promotion of a “social credit score.”
A handout image shows the Excelsior Pass, a platform that lets New Yorkers present proof of COVID-19 vaccination at events. (Office of Gov. Andrew Cuomo)
“How does [the CCP] keep a billion people under the thumb of a totalitarian regime?” she asked. “The CCP can find any dissident within five minutes, and that can happen here literally within months.”
Wolf referred to reports about Biden administration officials proposing the idea. The Washington Post and CNN — citing anonymous, unconfirmed sources — have suggested that the administration is working toward developing a national vaccine passport standard. New York state has proposed its own “Excelsior Pass” that would be used in large-scale venues such as Madison Square Garden. The plan has been lambasted by civil liberties groups and proponents.
On March 29, White House press secretary Jen Psaki addressed the claims, saying the administration doesn’t see a federal mandate for vaccine passports. “We believe it will be driven by the private sector,” she told reporters.
In other countries, such passports have already been created. Israel set one up in February to grant people access to gyms and hotels, Iceland now uses a passport to allow foreign travel, and Saudi Arabia has an app-based passport for people who are inoculated.
“The thing underpinning all of this is, what are you going to use it for?” said Melinda Mills, director of the Leverhulme Centre for Demographic Science at the University of Oxford, according to the Wall Street Journal. “Is it for international travel? Is it for getting a job? Is it for buying milk?”
If, like me, you believe in an approaching end of history as we have known it, you will find the attached article interesting to say the least. If you believe the end of history involves a return of Jesus, called the Christ or the Son of God, the coming change in the way money is ‘manufactured,’ distributed and controlled and the issues raised in the article are a portend of the shape of the world at its end.
Even if you do not believe in Jesus as a Messiah nor in his literal return, the article bears careful reading as the change in currency and the way money is regulated will affect us all. This is not an issue of, “If,” but rather, “How soon?”
Consider that on June 28, 1914, a 19-year-old Serbian nationalist shot and killed the Austrian Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife at point-blank range. Austria-Hungary was furious and with Germany’s support, declared war on Serbia, initiating The Great War, which we now call WWI.
When British Prime Minister showed a copy of a treaty with Hitler and declared, “Peace in our time,” in September 1938, he was only six months out from Germany’s breach of the treaty that propelled the Europe into its second World War.
The USA, deferring to isolationists in our country, stayed out to the war until a fateful morning raid on on December 7, 1941, by the Japanese air force that blasted Pearl Harbor into the ocean. By the end of the day, in an era before the internet, US government officials had gathered and on the next day declared war.
Life changed for millions of people overnight on November 9, 1989, with the “fall of the Berlin wall.” America responded immediately to the invasion of our county by radical terrorists on September 11, 2001, such that “9/11” is as emblazoned in our vocabulary as “Remember the Alamo” was in the minds of the people of 1836.
Instant information is accessible 24/7/365 and the shift from cash to digital currency will probably be as swift or faster than any of these listed previous events in history. How soon after will a “mark” be required to buy or sell? What will be the nature of said “mark?” A biometric identifier? An implanted chip?
We should not make predictions of end time events before they happen, as we who are Christ-followers are not prone to sensationalism or panic, and too much ink and attention has been given in times past to attempts to identify the “other-Christ” who will lead most of the world in rebellion against The God Who Is There.
However, it is hard to imagine a better presage to the Second Coming of the Christ than what will happen to the nature of currency in our lifetime.
Brace for the Digital-Money Wars
Digitizing the Chinese yuan—and eventually the dollar—would open new fronts in the fight over privacy and trade.
By Paul Vigna – WSJ –
Illustration: Mikel Jaso THE NOT-TOO-DISTANT FUTURE — The National Security Council holds an emergency meeting. North Korea has launched a missile, capable of carrying a nuclear warhead within range of U.S. forces in Guam. At this rate, North Korea could land a nuke on the U.S. mainland in less than a year.
The shocking advance in capability despite heavy trade sanctions is due to a stream of money that the U.S. and its allies cannot monitor — a cryptocurrency. But it is not one of the risky ones celebrated by overnight millionaires and largely avoided by serious investors, it is a new one, with the stamp of legitimacy: the digital yuan.
The scenario above is fiction, but it is not fantasy. If China digitizes its currency, as it plans to do, and the North Koreans use it to finance their missile program, it is a flow of money that circumvents U.S. sanctions. That would force the U.S. to grapple with its own now-antiquated currency. If the U.S. follows suit, digitizing the dollar in order to maintain its global economic dominance, it would also find itself in possession of a potentially powerful surveillance tool.
While bitcoin, the first successful cryptocurrency, was created to maintain anonymity in transactions, future digital currencies will be the opposite of anonymous.
And just as every transaction involving a digital yuan would be trackable by China, every digital dollar changing hands would be visible to the U.S., its issuing government. Banks might still manage the flow of money, but they will no longer be the record-keepers they once were.
“The fundamental nature of money is really changing,” said Neha Narula, the director of MIT Media Lab’s Digital Currency Initiative.
Dr. Narula played the president’s “cyber czar” in an enactment of the hypothetical North Korea scenario staged last month at Harvard’s Kennedy School. “Digital Currency Wars” also featured former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers as well as Ash Carter and Gary Gensler, all of whom have served in presidential administrations.
We are moving rapidly into a new monetary era. Countries and companies are looking at digital money as the new standard for their monetary systems and a replacement for actual cash.
Some of the benefits include faster, cheaper payments, a greater ability to root out money launderers, and a more open, inclusive financial system. Digital money is also going to provide new abilities to law enforcement and governments that will almost certainly open up another front in the fight over privacy.
“Privacy is one of the defining problems of our times,” said Emin Gün Sirer, chief executive of blockchain-based startup Ava Labs and a professor of computer science at Cornell University, and it will be with money, too. In practice, he said, it is almost impossible to create a form of digital money that doesn’t identify its users.
What we think of as “money” is actually an extraordinarily complex network of thousands of commercial banks and central banks. The system works but is costly and relatively inefficient because everybody is working off their own balance sheets. Digital money would create a system where everybody using a particular currency is working off the same balance sheet.
The idea of bitcoin, unveiled 11 years ago, was to compress the cumbersome functions of the modern financial system to enable money to move anywhere around the world, in minutes, for virtually no cost. If you have ever tried to send even $10 across a border, you can appreciate the allure in this.
But bitcoin was just Act One. Act Two began this summer, when Facebook uncovered its proposed cryptocurrency, libra. This wasn’t some loose confederation of cypher-punks and anti-bankers. Suddenly, one of the world’s biggest, most powerful (and most controversial) companies was saying it was going to make money.
A flurry of action followed. The U.S. Congress convened hearings and wrote bills to stop libra from launching. Regulators leaned on some of its original supporters to back out. The Bank of England’s Mark Carney suggested an international cryptocurrency should replace the dollar as the world’s new reserve currency. The Chinese went further. They took their own efforts into overdrive and are widely expected to launch a digital version of the yuan in the coming months.
“This is more than just Venmo, more than just PayPal,” said Aditi Kumar, executive director of Harvard’s Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, and playwright of “Digital Currency Wars.” “This is an entirely new way for countries to operate in the world,” she added. “It will make one or two actors all-powerful in the monetary system.”
The digital yuan China is planning is in fact a complete inversion of the bitcoin model. All of the data created would be centrally housed and become part of China’s surveillance state.
Money has always been a powerful, blunt instrument. It is an imposition not just of will, but of values. After World War II, the dollar became the foundation of the international monetary system. That gave the U.S. government a special tool. The U.S. has used its control over the dollar-based finance system to impose sanctions such as the ones on North Korea.
As the U.S. share of the global economy shrinks and that of countries like China and India expand, countries are actively seeking alternatives to the dollar.
In the fictional North Korea missile crisis, China would be tacitly allowing the financing of Pyongyang’s nuclear program to go through, because the government would be able to see where each digital yuan goes. That is an extreme, and entirely hypothetical scenario, of course, but it is an example of the leverage China would have over every transaction on its system. The only question is how heavy-handed the Chinese would be in using it.
While the Chinese model might be the far end of the spectrum, cryptocurrency has been moving in that direction. While bitcoin was designed to mimic the anonymity of cash in a digital setting, all its transactions are public, and therefore trackable. And Facebook’s libra would log transaction data, while recording user identities in a separate database. A central concern in Congress is what Facebook would do with that information.
Say the Federal Reserve digitized the U.S. currency. It could track how every dollar in circulation is spent. That might give it a great advantage in trying to figure out how the economy is growing, and where stimulus efforts would best be directed. But say people in government wanted to lock down some group or activity. They could do that, too. The role of banks would likely change considerably as well, though whether they gain or lose with a digital dollar would depend on how the government issued it.
Whether the U.S. will feel pressure to shift to digital still is not clear. There are proponents and opponents of cryptocurrencies in Congress. The Fed has examined the idea of creating a digital dollar, but that is all it has done.
At Harvard, Mr. Summers and his fellow stage actors spent some time debating this point. Some felt the U.S. should get in the game, others believed all they needed to do was make improvements to the existing system.
People need to start thinking about this now, Harvard’s Ms. Kumar said. China’s digital yuan will be a real-world proof of concept. The West will need to respond in some way. “Are we prepared for that?” she said. “Not just technically, but legally? Can we protect privacy in this new world?”