<html>
<body>
At 06:44 19/08/2013, parminder wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">On Monday 19 August 2013 09:46
AM, Jeremy Malcolm wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Its importance is that it
addresses a question, unresolved for the last eight years, about how
global Internet governance (in the broad sense that goes beyond technical
issues) should evolve in response to states claims of sovereignty over
public policy issues relating to the Internet. </blockquote><br>
Jeremy, thanks for this important wprk... But I must add that its
background cannot just be the "states claim to sovereignty over
pubic policy issues" but also the other process of fragmenting/
vaporising Internet-related global policy spaces, largely into
nothingness, and alternatively privatising them, both to serve status
quoist dominant interests. Any proposal must appropriately and carefully
navigate between these two problems or considerations.... parminder
</blockquote><br>
<a name="_GoBack"></a>If I read you correctly, the idea would be to
carefully navigate between statUS-quo's barriers to development and the
nothingness flood, while avoiding the sovereignty reefs. I beg to
disagree, however, and would instead ”put out into the deep sea and let
down the nets, so as to win men and women over” and help them all break
the Google-spell. <br><br>
I have put on-line my own recent mail
(<a href="http://iucg.org/wiki/20130816_-_An_OpenUse_point_of_view">
http://iucg.org/wiki/20130816_-_An_OpenUse_point_of_view</a>) about the
"hidden paradigm" that you call for and that I see emerging
from our mails. It is more about what we should build rather than
protesting against what others wish to constrain. <br><br>
I have been involved in the value added international network governance
since its very inception (1977) and co-led the active-content (extended
services) show until 1986 in pushing monopolies to interconnect and serve
everyone on a neutral basis. This was the case until business
progressively took over with the dumb passive content TCP/IP technology
and started transforming users into consumers. I never considered
"governments", ITU, UN, industry, lawyers, etc. to have any
particular networking impact. Let us be serious here, if all of these
entities were able to achieve something in networking we would have
observed it for a very, very long time. <br><br>
Business protecting "democracy" against "governments"
is a joke. Candidly, I feel more at ease with governments that I elect or
may oppose, and international organizations servants who want to help,
than with merchants whose job is to make money at our expense. .
<br><br>
However, there is one political powerful structure that actually knows a
lot about networking, business and dominance: this is an empire. What
really happened at the WSIS is that "the people from the world"
tried, in their four own main fields, to bargain for a non-imperial (at
least not overly imperial), sustainable (people rather than money
centered) esthetic for the human digitalized society and advise on an
ethic to be followed for attaining it through participation,
specifications, and achievements. <br><br>
- the target was that we would all participate in avoiding our own
e-colonization. The IGF was the most that we obtained. After the Bali
"ethic" HLLMeeting it might be business controlled.<br>
- I put online the map that they eventually specified
(<a href="http://iucg.org/wiki/WSISMAP-CARTESMSI">
http://iucg.org/wiki/WSISMAP-CARTESMSI</a>). Will we consider it or will
we be increasingly be T&L driven?<br>
- the question mark today is what should be achieved and how, while the
"dominance" manages to keep responsible and informed
stakeholders divided. <br><br>
Enhanced Cooperations ‘ECs) are for addressing needs together, and not
only by the dominant as in the ISOC and ICANN. We have needs. It is up to
us to initiate the enhanced cooperations that we need and that we
are able to lead. The UN, ITU, etc. are "enhanced cooperation"
mechanism governments that were founded in order to protect the world
from a unique dominance, with "dynamic coalitions" through
public opinion, press, NGOs , political parties, etc. to make sure that
Human Rights are not overly forgotten in the face of Dollar Rights. They
invited us to join. In turn Let us create our own ECs and let us invite
them to join.<br><br>
Best<br>
jfc</body>
</html>