Commentary
Many readers are no doubt familiar with nudge theory, a concept built around achieving compliance without using coercion. Ostensibly, nudges are designed to help people
make better decisions. However, when governments resort to nudging, we must ask, who benefits? Is this nudge actually a push? And in what direction, exactly, are we being pushed? From the United States to the UK, powerful governments are actively manipulating the masses through nudge-based initiatives.
In 2017, in recognition of his contributions to the field of behavioral economics, Richard Thaler was awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences. Along with Cass Sunstein, the distinguished American economist is best known for bringing nudge theory to prominence. The duo’s 2008 book, “Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness,” received rave reviews. Although the book is a fantastic read, it’s important to note that nudging is closely associated with “libertarian paternalism,” the rather naive idea that it’s entirely possible (and legitimate) for major institutions, including branches of government, to influence our behavior while also respecting our human agency.
It’s also important to note that the duo’s philosophies have enabled governments to employ highly manipulative methods. This isn’t a criticism of the two men; this is a criticism of the ways in which nudging has been weaponized by those in charge. Nudging is now synonymous with psychological manipulation and social engineering.
Which brings us to the UK, where nudging has been used for more than a decade to control the British people.
In 2010, The Behavioural Insights Team, also referred to as the “Nudge Unit,” was established by a coalition government. One of the reasons the unit was established,
we’re told, was to enable the British people to make “better choices for themselves.” However, as the recent pandemic demonstrated to full effect, the unit appears to have been created for more questionable reasons. The unit
has been blamed for assisting the UK government in the use of totalitarian-like tactics. During the pandemic, the unit stands accused of encouraging the government to deploy “fear, shame, and scapegoating.” A number of prominent psychologists also
criticized the unit for using “grossly unethical” tactics to scare British citizens into COVID-19 compliance. Of course, none of this has stopped the unit from making more dangerous recommendations.
Last year, the unit advised British banks to utilize the “wealth of data” that they possess to track the carbon footprint of the British people. The unit also appears to be in favor of introducing a
social credit-style system built around rewards and possible punishments. In a
rather eye-opening blog post, published in 2022, the unit revealed that it had signed a partnership with Cogo, a company dedicated to managing our carbon footprint. The unit and Cogo are currently exploring a number of ways in which “banks should go about nudging their customers to go green.”
The manipulative hustle, as is clear to see, never ends; it simply evolves with the times. During the pandemic, nudging was used to “persuade” people to mask up and agree to draconian lockdown measures. Now that the pandemic has ended, nudging will be used to usher in
an array of climate-driven initiatives.
In January, the unit released a report (
pdf) discussing the need for “social and behavioral transformation.” In an effort to live in a “net zero” world, citizens must be closely monitored. This includes monitoring what they buy, what they eat, their modes of transport, and whether or not their jobs are “climate-friendly.”
Yes, some American readers will say, but all of this is taking place in the UK; it could never happen here, in the good ol' U.S. of A. Sadly, it could. In fact, it’s been occurring for years. In 2009, a year before the UK established its infamous Behavioural Insights Unit, the Obama administration appointed the
aforementioned Cass Sunstein to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (
OIRA) and apply his nudge-based theories to government policies.
Fast forward to 2023, and the people of America are being nudged on a regular basis. In a piece published in 2022, Bloomberg Cities Network, a collaborative effort between Bloomberg and John Hopkins University,
discussed the fact that city halls across the country “have essentially created nudge units of their own.”
“In some cases,” the authors wrote, “this capacity is formalized within dedicated teams drawing direct inspiration from the U.K. experience.”
A comforting thought for very few readers, one imagines. At an individual level, nudging is an
ethically dubious act. When governments and branches of government begin nudging, however, it goes from being unethical to downright dangerous.
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
