<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div>What is this, the Spanish Inquisition, or maybe the caucus committee on Anti-multistakeholder activities?<br><br>--srs (iPad)</div><div><br>On 18-Sep-2013, at 21:28, Jean-Louis FULLSACK <<a href="mailto:jlfullsack@orange.fr">jlfullsack@orange.fr</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><p> </p>
<p>Norbert Bollow wrote :</p>
<p> </p>
<p><I would propose that people and organizations who purport to participate<br><as civil society should be asked to publish some statement about what<br><they do to ensure a high degree of independence.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>+1</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Jean-Louis Fullsack<br> <br><br><br><br><br></p>
<blockquote style="padding-left: 5px; margin-left: 5px; border-left: #ff0000 2px solid;">> Message du 18/09/13 17:04<br>> De : "Norbert Bollow" <br>> A : <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>> Copie à : <br>> Objet : Re: [governance] stakeholder categories (was Re: NSA sabotage of Internet security standards...)<br>> <br>> Peter H. Hellmonds wrote:<br>> <br>> > Norbert,<br>> > <br>> > How would you determine who has "a high degree of independence from<br>> > government and from commercial interests related to the topics on<br>> > which they engage"?<br>> <br>> I would propose that people and organizations who purport to participate<br>> as civil society should be asked to publish some statement about what<br>> they do to ensure a high degree of independence.<br>> <br>> If such a statement turns out to be significantly deceptive, that should<br>> be punishable as fraud. For example astroturf should be persecuted as a<br>> kind of such fraud.<br>> <br>> > Do you think that everyone of those who work for,<br>> > or even speak for, a specific government or business is by virtue of<br>> > that association not independent?<br>> <br>> Yes, in regard to topics which concern the policies or actions of that<br>> government, or which are directly related to specific business<br>> interests of that company.<br>> <br>> Being in the employment of an organization is the most obvious form of<br>> clearly not being independent from it.<br>> <br>> > And what value should lie in that independence?<br>> <br>> Making it easier to be not be unduly influenced in one's thinking by<br>> the particular interests of any of those entities which have strong<br>> particular interests related to the topic under discussion. <br>> <br>> > I presume that you<br>> > have lost trust in government agencies who spy on us just as much as<br>> > I do. And that you mistrust companies who have followed legal orders<br>> > or who have willingly cooperated or collaborated with those spy<br>> > agencies. That you have lost trust in the system of checks and<br>> > balances where those checks have clearly failed. I am fully with you<br>> > on that.<br>> <br>> I have also to a significant degree lost trust in my own ability to<br>> objectively think about matters of the public interest unless I take<br>> precautionary actions to prevent myself from being unduly influenced <br>> by phenomena like not risking to lose one's job, hope of winning someone<br>> as a customer, the very human need to be respected and accepted by the<br>> people who are one's peer group, etc.<br>> <br>> All the serious literature on this kind of phenomena (as far as I<br>> have read it) leads me to believe that this susceptibility (to forms of<br>> social corruption which are not illegal but nevertheless corrupting) is<br>> not just my personal problem, but in fact part of human nature.<br>> <br>> Consequently there is value in maintaining a kind of independence that<br>> is designed to minimize this kind of temptations.<br>> <br>> > But throwing all government or business people into the same<br>> > category of "untrustworthy because not independent" does not do<br>> > justice to the majority of people working in these organizations. <br>> <br>> That is not what I'm saying. I'm proposing a model of stakeholder<br>> categorization in which someone who is a engaging as a representative<br>> of any one of the stakeholder categories “government”, “civil<br>> society”, “private sector” is as a logical consequence of the<br>> definitions not at the same time and for the same issue engaging as a<br>> member of any other of these three stakeholder categories.<br>> <br>> A logical consequence of this is the need for a new category<br>> “multi/other”.<br>> <br>> I think that the introduction of such a “multi/other” category (which<br>> by definition does not have a specific “respective role” in Internet<br>> governance, but which is needed to ensure that everyone who does not<br>> neatly fit into one of the categories with specific “respective roles”<br>> can still fully participate in the discourse) violates neither the<br>> spirit nor the letter of the Tunis Agenda. Quite on the contrary, I<br>> this a logical consequence of taking the remark seriously about<br>> governments, civil society and private sector having “respective roles”<br>> in Internet governance without at the same time excluding from the<br>> discourse everyone who does not fit into such a “three categories of<br>> roles” model. <br>> <br>> > To answer your question: there is value in individuals, regardless of<br>> > affiliation, to maintain an independence of thought and to work<br>> > together in achieving common public policy goals.<br>> <br>> Of course.<br>> <br>> The whole point of multistakeholderism is to recognize and value what<br>> people and organizations of the different stakeholder categories can<br>> contribute to the discussions on the basis of their experiences,<br>> knowledge, and ability to take action.<br>> <br>> In particular I respect and value what private sector representatives<br>> bring to the table in terms of hand-on experience in creating and<br>> delivering relevant products and services, and in terms of their<br>> resulting ability to be change agents for positive changes.<br>> <br>> Conversely, I would like to request that the choice which I and others<br>> have made should also be respected, that we have chosen to engage in a<br>> way that is by design independent of commercial and government<br>> interests in the areas of our engagement.<br>> <br>> > Finally, I feel like you are trying to preach from a high tower when<br>> > you claim that "as every honest person will admit", the "trappings of<br>> > political power and of commercial interest" can "easily lead people<br>> > astray in their thinking."<br>> > <br>> > Do you mean by this that everyone who works in government or business<br>> > is suspicious of leaving his civil conscience, his ethics and morals,<br>> > behind by virtue of drawing a paycheck from a particular organization?<br>> > <br>> > Maybe you should throw that "holier-than-though" attitude that I<br>> > sense behind that claim<br>> <br>> Wanting to assert and preserve the specific particularity of “civil<br>> society” (in the sense in which I understand the term), and thereby<br>> the particular value that civil society can bring to the table in<br>> multistakeholder processes, has nothing to do with "holier-than-though".<br>> <br>> Similarly it has nothing to do with "holier-than-though" when private<br>> sector representatives point out that it is the private sector who<br>> creates and delivers relevant products and services.<br>> <br>> And it also has nothing to do with "holier-than-though" when people who<br>> register to international conferences as government representatives<br>> have to present proof of being part of the official delegation. For<br>> example just being a government employee is not sufficient.<br>> <br>> > and start engaging with those people and see who they really are and<br>> > how they think<br>> <br>> I'm doing that.<br>> <br>> For example, I'm taking note that right now, a private sector<br>> representative who is not just anyone but a person who has served on<br>> the MAG as a private sector representative, is telling me that I should<br>> maybe “throw” what I see as the very core of my choice to be a civil<br>> society person, and that moreover essentially everyone who can claim<br>> to have “ethics and morals” should be accepted as a civil society<br>> person even if at the same time they're representing government or<br>> private sector interests _in_the_topic_area_under_discussion_.<br>> <br>> If that view were to be accepted, in the context which we're discussing<br>> here (namely, multistakeholder processes in a Tunis Agenda context), it<br>> would effectively destroy civil society as a distinct stakeholder<br>> category.<br>> <br>> That demand to dilute the notion of “civil society” to the point of<br>> that notion no longer really meaning anything in particular is not just<br>> disrespectful, it is an outright attack on the ability of civil society<br>> (in the sense of what the term meant during the WSIS process, and in<br>> the only slightly evolved sense in which I use the word) to effectively<br>> participate.<br>> <br>> After all, if we allow the notion “civil society” to be diluted to a<br>> point where everyone can claim to be “civil society” on every issue,<br>> it is clear that whatever the framers of the Tunis Agenda saw as the<br>> specific “respective role” of civil society will clearly have been lost.<br>> (Here I use the word “whatever” to indicate that this argument is<br>> independent of whether we agree on what the role of civil society is or<br>> what it should be.)<br>> <br>> > before making such broad generalizations.<br>> <br>> I am not making a broad generalization here.<br>> <br>> I have many years of experience of engagement as a civil society<br>> representative, and the vast majority of private sector people with<br>> whom I've interacted have, in all their interactions with me, shown a<br>> high level of professional courtesy and professional integrity. That<br>> of course includes acceptance and respect for who I choose to be.<br>> <br>> What is going on here on the IGC mailing list where some people (who<br>> primarily identify as being private sector representatives or as<br>> members of the technical community, but who don't primarily see<br>> themselves as being “civil society”) are trying to tell civil society<br>> people to change their understanding of what is “civil society”, that<br>> is in my experience definitively the exception rather than the norm.<br>> <br>> Greetings,<br>> Norbert<br>> <br>> -- <br>> Recommendations for effective and constructive participation in IGC:<br>> 1. Respond to the content of assertions and arguments, not to the person<br>> 2. Be conservative in what you send, be liberal in what you accept<br>> <br>> <br>> ____________________________________________________________<br>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:<br>> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a><br>> To be removed from the list, visit:<br>> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a><br>> <br>> For all other list information and functions, see:<br>> <a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a><br>> To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:<br>> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a><br>> <br>> Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a><br>> </blockquote></div></blockquote><blockquote type="cite"><div><span>____________________________________________________________</span><br><span>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:</span><br><span> <a href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a></span><br><span>To be removed from the list, visit:</span><br><span> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a></span><br><span></span><br><span>For all other list information and functions, see:</span><br><span> <a href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a></span><br><span>To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:</span><br><span> <a href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a></span><br><span></span><br><span>Translate this email: <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a></span><br></div></blockquote></body></html>