CBDCs and Privacy: The Battle Between Control and Personal Rights

Earlier this May 2023, in the US, the state of Florida approved a ban on the use of any central bank digital currency (CBDC) as legal tender.

According to the bill, CBDCs are described as a digital medium of exchange or digital monetary unit of account issued by the US Federal Reserve System, a federal agency, a foreign government, a foreign central bank, or a foreign reserve system. The legislation thus prevents the state from accepting any type of CBDC as a form of payment.

During the same period, in the states of Indiana and Texas, the use of any CBDC was similarly prohibited.

In all three cases, the rationale turns out to be the same. Essentially, it is intended to prevent CBDCs from being implemented for general purposes and thereby establishing a direct link between consumers and the Federal Reserve System (central bank), as such a scenario could result in unprecedented levels of surveillance and control over private transactions and money ownership.

What is certain is that, while in the USA there still seems to be some good sense (which, in fact, comes as a surprise), in Europe there does not seem to be much concern about this issue.

Indeed, in Europe, the implementation of the digital euro is taken for granted (which says a lot about the autonomy and independence of the member states).

Fabio Panetta, a member of the Executive Board of the European Central Bank, discussed the project in the European Parliament in late April 2023.

Reportedly, the investigation phase is reaching its final stage.

The need for the digital euro to be "widely" accessible, easy to use for both individuals and merchants and with a "regulatory framework" that ensures its acceptance and "broad" access was stressed.

Fabio Panetta even reiterated that the regulatory framework for the digital euro will be crucial and "European lawmakers will play a key role in its success."

The question that arises is: is it really crucial? Are we not, once again, without due and ample debate, discussion, or informed consent, one step away from allowing the implementation of a new form of surveillance and control? This time, in the shadow of digital innovation?

The crucial space for debate, differentiation, and non-conformism continues to disappear.

There is a serious risk that this type of monetary system could be extended to record any type of personal information that the authorities may deem necessary, as well as to automatically and coercively punish any type of conduct that the authorities may deem inappropriate.

And this, regardless of the merit and wisdom of the decision and the real and true devaluation of the conduct.

Anyone who thinks that this fear is unfounded should perhaps think twice and take a look at what is happening within the Chinese credit system.

Incidentally, anyone who thinks that this fear is unfounded should perhaps listen to the statements made by Chistine Lagarde, President of the European Central Bank, on March 17, 2023.

Despite being uttered as part of a kind of “prank”, Christine Lagarde actually believed she was talking to Volodymyr Zelensky, President of Ukraine, and as part of that conversation admitted that the ECB is considering "limited control."

For Christine Lagarde, "limited control" means controlling only amounts higher than "300 or

400 euros" and even then she considers that not controlling these amounts would be "dangerous".

Thus, collectively, we continue to move towards a completely dystopian society, without the overwhelming majority of people having the slightest notion of the possible consequences.

Even today, many people barely know how to use a credit card or an ATM, let alone manage their digital assets through a mobile app on a smartphone or computer.

This, of course, is if there is a smartphone or computer. There are still many regions in Europe, and in the rest of the world, that still have limited access to banking services, to the internet, to smartphones or computers, or even to electricity or basic sanitation (which, in principle, is also necessary).

Portugal is, therefore, a good example of this. It is a good example of the lack of economic, social, or cultural conditions to embrace such "innovation". It is a good example of the lack of financial, digital, and technological literacy. Above all, it is a good example of the lack of literacy.

Perhaps it is not unreasonable for the European and Portuguese "legislators" to reflect seriously on the matter, preferably before they play the so-called "key role".