<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
<title></title>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#333333">
<font face="sans-serif">These articles especially the one by Fisk
raises important issues about the global political discourse. And this
is
my attempt to connect the breath-taking events in Tunisia with the kind
of stuff we do here in IGC. The article shows how concepts like
democracy and FoE are instrumentalised by powerful players with vested
interests. Even with what we all know about the western media, and west
interests dominated global media - it was quite surprising for me how
little news went around in the days when these events were unfolding in
Tunisia. And in relation to it, how the smallest non-event about Iran -
of the evil axis - is immediately hot global news. <br>
<br>
Apparently, western interests supporting authoritarian regimes are not
only fine, they are needed, but any anti-west regime is immediately and
unpardonably undemocratic, suppressing human rights and the such. <br>
<br>
It is in this respect important that global civil society really knows
and focuses on what it believes in, what is it trying to achieve and
who all it aligns with. We seek democracy, equity, power for the people
and human rights. We basically seek more equitable distribution of
power, and we fight against undue concentration of power, which almost
always gets abused. <br>
<br>
These are the 'civil society' values. I mention this term 'CS values'
because I read in one of the emails during the hot discussion on the
CSTD WG composition how we should judge governments and other actors
vis a vis their adherence to 'CS values' which set me thinking what
really was meant by this term. The writer of the email mostly meant
MS-ism (multistakeholderism).<br>
<br>
We need to judge actors in the IG space not just on this one dimension,
but on the more basic CS values I mention above. And as long as the
practical impact of some kinds of MS-ism is further concentration of IG
power in the hands of those who are already most powerful, it hardly
relates to 'CS values'.This is what one often sees</font><font
face="sans-serif"> happening i</font><font face="sans-serif">n the
global IG realm . <br>
<br>
We need to judge where does the greatest concentration of power lies
today vis a vis how the Internet is being shaped and used globally, and
then see what can we do to democratise this power. This in my view is
the role of civil society in IG, and is what we should judge ourselves
against.<br>
<br>
I came into MS-ism to ensure that IG political space is opened to those
who are most dis-empowered, and when one sees MS-ism often used as a
convenient hand maiden by those already most powerful in shaping the
Internet - mega digital corporations and western govs - and the CS
blindly and uncritically following the bandwagon, I do think we need
some serious reconsideration of our ideals and our strategies. I hope
the proposed initiative </font><font face="sans-serif">by the
co-coordinators </font><font face="sans-serif">to relook at IGC's
vision. strategies etc does such deep introspection. Parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</font><br>
CW Mail wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:A75832E3-16A1-49B3-B31C-3CC9FDC5551A@christopherwilkinson.eu"
type="cite">
<div>
<div>FYI, the Robert Fisk article is at:</div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/the-brutal-truth-about-tunisia-2186287.html">http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/the-brutal-truth-about-tunisia-2186287.html</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>and Brian Whitaker is at:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/brianwhitaker">http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/brianwhitaker</a></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>CW</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
PK</pre>
</body>
</html>