<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Wednesday 13 March 2013 01:31 PM,
Nick Ashton-Hart wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:27CD7FE8-64E1-48E7-953C-B4002BD72768@ccianet.org"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<snip>
<div>I did, indeed - and I noted that many historians took issue
with many aspects of the storyline too. Even Lincoln admitted
that freeing the slaves was a deliberate policy choice which
helped increase the manpower available to the North while
causing disruption in the South due to the incentive it gave to
the slaves to rebel and/or run away. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>All this does not diminish the achievement or the
statesmanship - but it perfectly illustrates my point, that
major shifts in human legal frameworks are preceded by major
shifts in society or general warfare - not anticipated by them.</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
1. Enough structural changes have happened because of the Internet,
and the directions of more are relatively clear, for it to be what
the European Commission's Vice President a few years back called as
the emergence of a 'constitutional moment' in relation to IG.
Council of Europe held a workshop at an IGF with ' 'constitutional
moment' in its title. <br>
<br>
2. Enough number of times historically big political texts got done
in anticipation, and in fact led to shaping of societies, as some
may have followed events.<br>
<br>
3. It is not only an issue of what generally happens, but what is
desirable; do you really think that in global IG space political
agreements should follow crises rather than anticipate them? Civil
society takes up forwarding looking issues, positions and roles, it
is not just in the business of cynical historical interpretations
that deny our collective agency, and general good nature.<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
</body>
</html>