[governance] MSism and democracy
"Julián Casasbuenas G."
julian at colnodo.apc.org
Wed Jun 8 09:45:14 EDT 2011
There is a new version of the platform List-o (list-o.org,
http://sourceforge.net/projects/list-o/) and it works with Mailman using the
Google translation system.
Best,
Julián
El 08/06/11 07:40, Rui Correia escribió:
> Hi What happened to the translation feature that the list used to have,
> provided by by funredes? I admit I never really looked much into that
> (actually can't remember - it was quite a few years back), so I don't know how
> much human interaction it required or whether it was wholly automatic. Carlos?
> Can you weigh in on this?
>
> Surely by now that must be software to reroute postings to lists via a
> translation engine such as Google Translator? It is not ideal, but it is a
> solution and Google Translate has improved a lot over the years.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rui
>
>
> 2011/6/8 Ginger Paque <gpaque at gmail.com <mailto:gpaque at gmail.com>>
>
> Hmmm... I have mixed feelings about this, even though it looks like the
> title is MSism... Multilingualism :)
>
> While I firmly believe we need to have more discussions in other
> languages, particularly Spanish, we need to be able to communicate with
> the larger community, and the common second language seems to be English.
>
> How can we manage both ideas?
> Saludos, ginger
>
> On 6/8/2011 7:20 AM, Carlos Vera wrote:
>> Ya empezo el debate.. como lo seguimos..
>>
>> Carlos
>>
>> 2011/6/8 Roxana Goldstein <goldstein.roxana at gmail.com
>> <mailto:goldstein.roxana at gmail.com>>
>>
>> Genial esto, pero si no empezamos a tener debate en otros idiomas no
>> vamos a cambiar las preocupantes tendencias de las que se habla acá.
>> Lo vengo diciendo siempre en todos los espacios de la sociedad civil
>> del IGF, con nada de éxito.
>> Desde latino américa, Argentina específicamente,
>> Roxana Goldstein
>>
>>
>> 2011/6/8 parminder <parminder at itforchange.net
>> <mailto:parminder at itforchange.net>>
>>
>> Dear Bertrand,
>>
>> Thanks for engaging with this discussion. I have always been very
>> keen to get a serious discussion going on this subject, and
>> rather to the contrary of what you say, it is the
>> multistakeholderism (MS) enthusiast who have run away from
>> probing questions both of (1) the principled and logical basis
>> of their beliefs and stances and (2) the precise working models
>> of governance that they propose. I hope in this present
>> discussion they, and you, can answer such questions.
>>
>> I have quite often stated my problems with MSism as it mostly
>> gets spoken of and practised in IG arena, including at the recent
>> CoE meeting during the panel discussion moderated by you.
>>
>> Your email raises two specific issues, the first one is
>>
>> "what I am missing in your very critical comment ("/it is very
>> much the wrong direction/") is the proposed alternative;"
>>
>> The alternative is the original corrective to the shortcomings of
>> representational democracy. This is what is spoken of as
>> deepening democracy or what we may also call as participatory
>> democracy (though not the anarchic versions of it which suffer
>> from the precise ill you speak of - a real workable alternative
>> model). Its institutional forms - existing and those possible in
>> the future - have been well discussed in literature, and there is
>> enough stuff about practical working models as well, including
>> some about the global space. I am ready, in fact eager, to have a
>> specific discussion on this.
>>
>> I have always engaged positively by presenting proposals of
>> working models of what I (or we) want, and what for us is taking
>> democracy forward rather than supplanting it. We, as in my
>> organisation, worked with the Indian government delegates to come
>> up with a clear proposal on how MAG for instance should be
>> constituted, which addresses the negatives of MSism. This part of
>> the 'Indian proposal' is enclosed, which is also largely
>> contained in the contribution IT for Change made to the process.
>> Is it not specific enough? Now, reversing the 'inquiring role' I
>> am eager to know what are your own views on it.
>>
>> The second issue your raise is contained in the following part of
>> your email.
>>
>> ".......imperfect as they are, aren't the experiences currently
>> under way presenting more potential for broad participation,
>> openness and "deeper democracy" (to use your formulation) than
>> using only intergovernmental interaction in the UN or the G8 ? In
>> a nutshell, what would you like to see that would be so different
>> from what is being attempted in the IGF, for instance, that it
>> would justify thrashing it instead of perfecting it ?"
>>
>> First of all I agree that 'only intergovernmental interaction in
>> the UN or the G8' is not at all a good model, and it requires
>> huge huge improvements changes. This must be obvious from my
>> contributions to the IGC and other forums. However, my contention
>> also is that MSism as currently practised in the IG arena may
>> actually be making things worse.
>>
>> Deeper or participatory democracy is about getting in voices that
>> are less powerful and less heard otherwise into the political
>> processes. Can you honestly say that this is what the MS model in
>> IG is doing currently? I do not think so. I think it has become a
>> cover or a legitimising device for increased influence on policy
>> making of those who are already very powerful, with which I mean
>> the big business in the digital/ IT/ Internet space. There are
>> numerous examples of this, and what is more problematic is how
>> such huge transgressions to political and democratic propriety
>> are routinely responded to by 'deep silences' on the part of
>> MSism upholders. Such silences favouring the interests of the
>> powerful, as you will also see from the Spanish protests (as also
>> earlier ones in the Arab world), are the very anti-thesis of new
>> democratic processes that we would like to see take root.
>> Following are but a very few examples of what MSism in IG space
>> is really showing up to be....
>>
>> 1) Anyone who has seen MAG work know who almost completely
>> dominates the discourse and the outcomes thereof. I wont go into
>> specific details here but am happy to discuss this further if you
>> so want. Developing country gov reps have consistently raised
>> this issue in their private conversations about the IGF and the
>> MAG. Very often this is the first and the main issue they raise,
>> and I have to agree with them.
>>
>> 2) e G 8 forums, which despite our protests remained what it was
>> supposed to. Then there is this French presidents digital
>> advisory council made exclusively of big business.
>>
>> 3) Two mega digital corporations, most affected by the proposed
>> regulation, together practically wrote the net neutrality
>> legislation of the the county which is the digital capital of the
>> world. One would, today, still think it impossible that the top
>> drug company and the top private hospital chain in the US
>> 'openly' (lobbying and pushing text secretively is a different
>> thing) come up with the default health policy draft, even in the
>> US. This is an instance of the kind of 'firsts' that the IG world
>> is contributing to our political systems, and the MS discourse
>> certainly has something to so with it.
>>
>> 4) The UN broadband commission was headed by someone who has a
>> practical monopoly on a major country's telecom business, and who
>> acquired this business by buying off the incumbent public sector
>> company through means that have been severely questioned. Again a
>> first in the name of MSism.
>>
>> 5) Closer home in India, some proprietary software and digital
>> content companies, interested in the huge public education
>> 'market' of India, quite ingeniously managed to become the key
>> and driving participants of an 'officially' mandated MS process
>> of writing a draft for India's 'ICTs in schools' policy. The
>> draft that came out was of course on the expected lines. It took
>> a huge amount of work from organisation like ours to get the
>> drafting process scrapped by the minister involved. But such
>> things have not stopped.... So it is not for the joy of
>> contrarinian-ism that I offer critiques to MSism, this has had
>> central implications to my organisation's political struggles.
>>
>> 6) Dept of IT in India has a couple of advisory groups consisting
>> only of big business reps apart form gov, and also frequently
>> holds consultations where only these big business reps are
>> invited. (see for a recent meeting of such kind
>> http://www.mit.gov.in/sites/upload_files/dit/files/MinutesofmeetingNationalRolloutofe-district2ndMay2011.pdf
>> ). This kind of stuff, thankfully, still does not happen in any
>> other department in India.
>>
>> The instances are endless. So when you say there are issues with
>> MSism, to quote your email, 'such as the risks of capture, the
>> weight of some actors, the north-south unbalances and the
>> representation of the unrepresented' , one needs to know clearly
>> what is being done about them. Merely mentioning them as a
>> footnote is of little use to those whom these issues really
>> bother. What I see is that there seems not even the readiness to
>> debate these issues, much less do anything about them, which to
>> me confirms my hypothesis regarding who holds the reins of much
>> what goes for MSism in the IG arena.
>>
>> Also, another question that MSists never seem to respond to is -
>> are they ready to have their countries governed through the same
>> kind of hazy MSism as they recommend for global governance? If
>> not why this discrimination - democracy at home, MSism abroad. Is
>> it because global democracy brings the danger of global
>> redistributions with it, and MSism on the other hand helps
>> promote Northern businesses establish even greater global
>> dominance and thus creates transfer channels in directions
>> opposite to what globally democratic political systems will tend
>> to do. Is this not the actual reason for Northern governments'
>> enthusiasm for MSism in the global IG arena (but not at places
>> where they themselves make decisions), and what is really behind
>> the 'friendly governments' discourse frequently heard on this list.
>>
>> Happy to hear you responses to the above and engage further.
>>
>> Parminder
>>
>> On Thursday 02 June 2011 09:37 PM, Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:
>>> Dear Parminder,
>>>
>>> Thanks for sharing the article.
>>>
>>> Two points on your remarks:
>>> - fully agree on "new institutional possibilities of
>>> participatory democracy" not fully explored yet; probably new
>>> tools can be invented;
>>> - I know your reticences - often voiced on the list - regarding
>>> the current modalities of "multi-stakeholderism" and some of
>>> them do deserve attention (such as the risks of capture, the
>>> weight of some actors, the north-south unbalances and the
>>> representation of the unrepresented); however, what I am missing
>>> in your very critical comment ("/it is very much the wrong
>>> direction/") is the proposed alternative; imperfect as they are,
>>> aren't the experiences currently under way presenting more
>>> potential for broad participation, openness and "deeper
>>> democracy" (to use your formulation) than using only
>>> intergovernmental interaction in the UN or the G8 ?
>>>
>>> In a nutshell, what would you like to see that would be so
>>> different from what is being attempted in the IGF, for instance,
>>> that it would justify thrashing it instead of perfecting it ?
>>>
>>> Best
>>>
>>> Bertrand
>>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> governance at lists.cpsr.org <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> governance at lists.cpsr.org <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>> To be removed from the list, visit:
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>> For all other list information and functions, see:
>> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>
>>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
> governance at lists.cpsr.org <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
> To be removed from the list, visit:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>
> For all other list information and functions, see:
> http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
> http://www.igcaucus.org/
>
> Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> _________________________
> Mobile Number in Namibia +264 81 445 1308
> Número de Telemóvel na Namíbia +264 81 445 1308
>
> I am away from Johannesburg - you cannot contact me on my South African numbers
> Estou fora de Joanesburgo - não poderá entrar em contacto comigo através dos
> meus números sul-africanos
>
> Rui Correia
> Advocacy, Human Rights, Media and Language Consultant
> Angola Liaison Consultant
>
> _______________
>
--
Julian Casasbuenas G.
Director Colnodo
Diagonal 40A (Antigua Av. 39) No. 14-75, Bogota, Colombia
Tel: 57-1-2324246, Cel. 57-315-3339099 Fax: 57-1-3380264
www.colnodo.apc.org - Uso Estratégico de Internet para el Desarrollo
Miembro de la Asociacion para el Progreso de las Comunicaciones -APC-
www.apc.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20110608/c5f386ed/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, visit:
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
For all other list information and functions, see:
http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
http://www.igcaucus.org/
Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t
More information about the Governance
mailing list