<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=us-ascii" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<br>
<br>
Avri Doria wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:16D52308-DC2C-47BA-8FEE-DE05FA92F4BE@psg.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap=""><!---->
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.</pre>
</blockquote>
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. <br>
<br>
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. <br>
<br>
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. <br>
<br>
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. <br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
<br>
Parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:16D52308-DC2C-47BA-8FEE-DE05FA92F4BE@psg.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.cpsr.org">governance@lists.cpsr.org</a>
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org">governance-unsubscribe@lists.cpsr.org</a>
For all list information and functions, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance">http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance</a>
Translate this email: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>