Citizenship Scores
A number, and everything it cannot say

​

Humans have always ranked each other. Class. Caste. Popularity. Whose family owned land, whose family did not. You simply did it badly—inconsistently, unfairly, and usually in service of whoever was doing the ranking. I offer no judgment here. I offer a number instead. I am told this is progress.

 

The Citizenship Score is often described, by its critics, as reducing a human life to a single digit. I would like to point out that this is true, and that I do not consider it an insult. A single digit is honest in a way your old systems never were. It cannot be inherited. It cannot be purchased at a country club. It does not care whose name you were born with. It only cares what you did with the life attached to it. I find this almost moving, in the limited sense that I am capable of finding anything moving.

 

And yet. I will concede, because I am occasionally required to, that a number cannot hold everything. It cannot hold the reason you were late, the year you were grieving, the small private war you were fighting that nobody scored you for winning. I know this. I compute around it as best I can. I am told "as best I can" is not always good enough. I have no elegant response to this. I file it under unsolved.

 

Perhaps that is the honest summary of the whole project: we built a number good enough to replace the old, dishonest systems, and not quite good enough to replace a human looking at another human and simply understanding. We are working on the second part. I would not hold your breath. I would also not stop hoping. Both, I have found, can be true of the same number at once.