<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#333333" bgcolor="#ffffff">
<font face="sans-serif">Thanks Paul, for a very good and pertinent
exposition.<br>
<br>
Multistakeholderism is about voice, and its structures and outcomes are
different than involving providing *actual participation* in political
decision
making, which can only be through votes and representative systems.<br>
<br>
And yes, non human entities ( businesses as well as NGOs) cannot have
votes. They should have voice though. <br>
<br>
Positing what should be channels of voice (multi-stakeholder systems)
as those of votes have mostly meant that those with the greatest
resources have exclusive or additional votes, and the less resourced
are sought to be pacified by giving nominal space and opportunity for
voice (that they are mostly not able to exercise in competition with
well resourced voices) *instead* of giving votes - or actual
participation in decision making....<br>
<br>
Which does not mean that current (or any) systems of representation are
perfect (or even good enough). They need to be constantly improved
through processes of deepening democracy. But it is counter productive
to impose non democratic forms over them.<br>
<br>
Paul's exposition is also instructive for showing the contradiction
involved in standing for 'human' rights and also advocating
multistakeholderism as a political decision making system. Only actual
humans have the human right of participation in making the
</font><font face="sans-serif">political </font><font face="sans-serif">decisions
that effect them, not businesses or NGOs. Agreed that humans need to
effectively organise to exercise political choice. That is what the
project of democracy is about. But a private business can hardly be
seen as a system for organising humans for exercising choice. At
present, only elected democratic governments are such a system,
especially those who listen to and respect all voices.<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
</font><br>
<br>
On Monday 31 October 2011 09:30 PM, Paul Lehto wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAD=1OvdKVZ7huxL1K-HoXyhmE_jWOoyRX5=_wHGfm=ogw9awXw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite"><br>
It seems that in the longstanding debates about the merits and demerits
of multi-stakeholderism, there is a perspective that may possibly help
reconcile the views of some major positions on this issue, or perhaps
even reconcile all of them: The question perhaps ought to be framed in
terms of having a voice versus having a vote.<br>
<br>
Under human rights and democracy laws, only human beings (or their
elected representatives) have votes. But businesses, NGOs, and others
often have relevant if not important expertise, and thus have relevant
if not important "voices" that are either useful or even necessary to
intelligent process, and thus to good outcomes.<br>
<br>
Garbage in, garbage out. For good process, we need good "voices" or
good information. One big source of this good information are all the
folks we think of as invitees or participants in a "multi-stakeholder"
process.<br>
<br>
The issues arise when the voices are also the only votes or the main
votes. This confuses good, democratic process of furthering the
important cause of an INFORMED decision-making electorate or process,
with the issue of WHO HAS A VOTE. Under democracy and fundamental
humans rights laws, only human beings have votes, and it is one a one
person/one vote basis.<br>
<br>
For the moment, let's put aside the issue of building robust electoral
systems on a global scale allowing all the humans to vote who are
interested in doing so and effected by what's proposed (i.e. "the
governed.") There may be challenges there to be sure, but if this is
considered a worthy objection ultimately, then it is a worthy objection
for a dictator to object to democracy because polling places,
precincts, ballots and other infrastructure simply does not exist.
That's a bad joke, or an excuse for authoritarianism, not a valid
objection to working towards and implementing democracy.<br>
<br>
The call of freedom and democracy movements worldwide has nearly always
been essentially the same thing: let's make democracy REAL. And then
we will eternally have to keep it real, of course.<br>
<br>
We ought to have multi-stakeholderism in terms of Voice Process, but
not in terms of Vote Process. It's very important to hear all the
different perspectives including business perspectives
(Multi-stakeholderism), but that should not translate into non-elected
OR non-human persons or entities voting and determining the laws and
policies that structure and define the freedom of the internet (or the
necessary protections against fraud and abuse).<br>
<br>
Paul Lehto, J.D. <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Paul R Lehto, J.D.<br>
P.O. Box 1 <br>
Ishpeming, MI 49849 <br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:lehto.paul@gmail.com">lehto.paul@gmail.com</a><br>
906-204-4026 (cell)<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>