<html><head/><body><html><head><meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type" /></head><body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">Hi,<br>
<br>
I do not see the contradiction in 1. You are assuming that the citizens have only one form of participation. And you are assuming that people only interact in government in one way. Personally I also advocate a multistakeholder approach within a country by those living in that country. Of course that its not the case very often at this point. As for enforcement that happens in many ways, some of which may even be citizen based.<br>
<br>
On the second point, ultimately the legitimacy of any government rests with the citizen, whether as voter, organizer, advocate, demonstrator or activist. So government only rules to the extent to which those who live in a country allow them to rule. Indeed in case of the worse autocracy the citizen effort to change things is quite huge and sometimes deadly, but as the seasonal, color and other revolutions show, the people have the power when they decide they need to take the power.<br>
<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">"Guru गुरु" <Guru@ITforChange.net> wrote:<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding-left: 1ex;">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 04/15/2013 05:18 PM, Avri Doria
wrote:<br />
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:6b819825-adf1-439f-88b1-49ae71a97f2a@email.android.com" type="cite">I think I answered it several times in several ways. <br />
<br />
Within their respective countries they, whether North Korea,
Azerbaijan or Sweden, get to enforce laws to the extent that
citizens allow on those within their physical territory.<br />
<br />
</blockquote>
<br />
Avri,<br />
<br />
1. From your line above, I suppose you accept that other
stakeholders in each of these (and other) countries will not have a
role in enforcing law within their physical territory, which the
Governments have. <br />
<br />
If you do accept this, then your wish that "government
participation as equal/equivalent stakeholders in Internet
governance" contradicts the above, in the context of law enforcement
within their physical territory. Will you accept that your wish is
meaningless to the extent of this contradiction.<br />
<br />
<br />
2. I could not understand what you mean by "to the extent that
citizens allow", do you mean that the citizens can refuse
enforcement of law by the Government. Would you extend such a
privilege to decide what laws to follow and what not to follow to
areas other than IG? <br />
<br />
I request your clarifications. <br />
<br />
Guru<br />
ps - On the issue of law enforcement beyond territorial borders, I
hope to seek clarification separately<br />
<br />
<br />
<blockquote cite="mid:6b819825-adf1-439f-88b1-49ae71a97f2a@email.android.com" type="cite">
<div class="gmail_quote">"Guru गुरु" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:Guru@ITforChange.net"><Guru@ITforChange.net></a>
wrote:
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt
0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204);
padding-left: 1ex;">
<pre style="white-space: pre-wrap; word-wrap:break-word; font-family: sans-serif; margin-top: 0px">On 04/15/2013 06:55 AM, Avri Doria wrote:
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #729fcf; padding-left: 1ex;">On 14 Apr 2013, at 12:37, Roland Perry wrote:
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0pt 0pt 1ex 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid #ad7fa8; padding-left: 1ex;">But here, on the IGC list, what I'm attempting to do (for the sake of avoiding any misunderstanding) is discovering what the various correspondents understand to be "the Internet", upon which they wish "no government interference".
I asked a question of Avri, perhaps you could answer it also.
</blockquote>I tend to think of the Internet as an emergent, and emerging, reality consisting of hardware, protocols and software, and human intentionality brought together by a common set of design principles and constrained by policies fashioned
by the stakeholders.
I beleive "no government interference" is an inaccurate representation of what I wish for. I wish for "no government control," I also wish for government participation as equal/equivalent stakeholders in Internet governance. I am sure that would be considered government interference by some. And would be considered "no government interference" by others.
avri
</blockquote>Avri
Do you think government needs to enforce law. would such enforcement
require 'control'? (I think andrea glorioso asked this question in two
emails pointedly but i think without response)
Guru
</pre>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br />
~~~<br />
avri
</blockquote>
<br />
</blockquote></div><br>
~~~<br>
avri</body></html></body></html>