[governance] methods was CSTD

[parminder]

Avri Doria wrote:
>
> so have we been able to introduce any new working methods or ways of reaching outcomes in the IGC?
>
> if we can't even do it here, in a group that seems to want to do it, what makes us think we can just convince the other stakeholders that they should do so.
>
> a.
I am not sure what you are driving at, Avri. Governance and politics is 
not an optional 'game' in which we may want to participate or not. It is 
a key, perhaps even central, social function necessary for societies to 
survive.

Whether a set of social actors are able to get their act together 
towards some outcome based processes depends on how strongly these 
actors see/ feel the need of these processes and outcomes. As I said in 
my email to Bill alluding to the political economy of the Internet that 
some may be more 'relaxed' about how things are at present as per their 
situation/ interests and other rather more eager and anxious to move 
forward for similar reasons. However in the final analysis purposeful 
governance of an social phenomenon as strong as pervasive as the 
Internet is not an option, it is a necessity.

As for convincing 'other stakeholders' such convincing too has a 
context. For instance one cannot too easily convince large business that 
they need to be regulated (remember financial crisis). Almost same with 
institutions who at present 'independently' do technical coordination 
functions related to the Internet. Or a country that enjoys unilateral 
control over key infrastructural elements. I think we too easily exclude 
issues of power and countervailing power and power contestations 
involved in governance and political areas and focus too exclusively on 
win-win ideals. A balance between the two needs to be kept.

However I did read with fascination the various new possibilities and 
means described by Dr Newman which I think denote interesting frontiers 
of participative democracy. However these methods would still need to be 
used along with many traditional ones.

Basically, a lot of civil society advocacy - and almost all that goes 
under the label of progressive civil society - is premised on deep 
dissatisfaction with existing power structures and equations that are 
considered unfair and unjust, and it attempt to correct them through 
political action. Our advocacy work around falls within this larger goal 
- whereby Internet is sought to be made into an instrument of reducing 
social inequalities and injustices rather let it - and it does do it 
often - further exacerbate them.


Parminder


> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>      governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
> For all list information and functions, see:
>      http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100524/1dab0ce7/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t