<HTML xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:v =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w =
"urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m =
"http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml"><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<STYLE><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";
color:black;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY lang=EN-US dir=ltr link=blue bgColor=white vLink=purple>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000">
<DIV>Just for clarity – the back and forth here is between Michael’s comments
and Jeremy’s - only the first sentence below quoted is mine.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Ian</DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=gurstein@gmail.com
href="mailto:gurstein@gmail.com">michael gurstein</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Sunday, October 26, 2014 2:34 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=governance@lists.igcaucus.org
href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</A> ;
<A title=jmalcolm@eff.org href="mailto:jmalcolm@eff.org">'Jeremy Malcolm'</A>
</DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> RE: [governance] Tweedledum and Tweedledee WAS Re:
[bestbits] Time-sensitive: 24 hour sign on period for ITU Plenipot joint
recommendations</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style='FONT-SIZE: small; TEXT-DECORATION: none; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri"; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; COLOR: #000000; FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline'>
<DIV class=WordSection1>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'>Inline…<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'><o:p></o:p></SPAN> </P>
<DIV>
<DIV
style="BORDER-TOP: #b5c4df 1pt solid; BORDER-RIGHT: medium none; BORDER-BOTTOM: medium none; PADDING-BOTTOM: 0in; PADDING-TOP: 3pt; PADDING-LEFT: 0in; BORDER-LEFT: medium none; PADDING-RIGHT: 0in">
<P class=MsoNormal><B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma","sans-serif"; COLOR: windowtext'>From:</SPAN></B><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 10pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Tahoma","sans-serif"; COLOR: windowtext'>
governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org
[mailto:governance-request@lists.igcaucus.org] <B>On Behalf Of </B>Jeremy
Malcolm<BR><B>Sent:</B> Friday, October 24, 2014 2:32 PM<BR><B>To:</B>
governance@lists.igcaucus.org<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: [governance] Tweedledum and
Tweedledee WAS Re: [bestbits] Time-sensitive: 24 hour sign on period for ITU
Plenipot joint recommendations<o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></DIV></DIV>
<P class=MsoNormal><o:p></o:p> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal>On 24/10/2014 12:48 pm, Ian Peter
wrote:<BR><BR><o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal>I think multistakeholderism was/is an attempt to overcome
these problems. However, its track record to date is not brilliant when it comes
to making progress on important matters, nor is its inclusiveness
brilliant.<o:p></o:p></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><BR>I agree, but the sweeping criticisms of the
multi-stakeholder model that we hear from JNC members are directed at immature
implementations of that model of which - here's the point - proponents of
multi-stakeholderism have themselves been highly critical!<SPAN
style="COLOR: #1f497d"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><I><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'>[MG>]
so what else is the JNC to comment upon… there is no definition, no articulation
of principles, no useful formulation that one can respond to and yet the MS
proponents such as the USG and its allies in CS and elsewhere want to remake the
governance of the global (Internet) world in its image. Maybe it is all being
done in good faith and with the best of intentions (and I have a bridge in
Brooklyn which you might want to buy—cheap) or maybe it is a calculated move by
some and naivety by others to find a way of giving the global (primarily US
based) corporates a governance model which formalizes and legitimizes their
increasingly dominant position in the variety of areas of global governance of
which the Internet is only one—international public health, food and nutrition,
international resource management, environmental regulation and so on are
others. To accomplish this the proponents from the USG, from the WEF, from
Google etc. provide a sop to Civil Society and gain their compliance and along
with it a degree of legitimation by giving them the illusion of effective
participation (the outcome of NetMundial anyone… <o:p></o:p></SPAN></I></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><I><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></I></B> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><I><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'>An
extremely risky tradeoff by anyone’s measure and one that is particularly
disgusting because it is being agreed to by CS folks (for the most part
thankfully still confined in the IG space) without the agreement or even
knowledge of either their constituencies such as they are (APC are you
listening) or the broader global civil society which they are meant to provide
voice for. </SPAN></I></B><BR><BR>They also overlook the extent to which
attempts to improve these implementations have been fiercely resisted. Do
I even need to mention this? Jean-Christophe says "MS has mainly kept the
status quo, and will keep maintaining it if CS do not change their music" - how
can it be said that civil society has been in favour of the status quo in
multi-stakeholder Internet governance?<BR><BR>Take a look, for example, at the
latest Best Bits statement to the IGF, which is now open for endorsement (please
do so if you agree) which reiterates criticisms of the IGF's implementation of
the multi-stakeholder model that we have been repeating endlessly for almost a
decade:<BR><BR>bestbits.net/igf-2014-taking-stock/<SPAN
style="COLOR: #1f497d"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><I><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'>[MG>]
I/we/the JNC etc. are not commenting on the various “immature implementations”
of MSism but rather on MSism as a governance model meant to supplant, supersede,
replace democracy as the aspirational model for governance in modern
society.</SPAN></I></B><BR><BR>The fact that these criticisms haven't been taken
into account can't be attributed to civil society, and doesn't amount to grounds
for abandoning the ideals behind multi-stakeholder governance just because they
haven't yet been achieved. Their achievement will be the work of decades,
not years.<SPAN style="COLOR: #1f497d"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><I><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'>[MG>]
yes the replacement of a model of governance that has taken millennia to build
and cost the lives of thousands of brave folks and may yet cost the lives of
even more (see for example the streets of Hong Kong… BTW, the young
protestors in Hong Kong aren’t protesting for multi-stakeholderism where the
dominant corporate barons of contemporary China can and will sit at the table
with the dominant (civil society?) party structures and dominant governmental
structures to determine the fate of the Hong Kong people, that is what they have
already! They are putting their lives, bodies and futures on the line for
DEMOCRACY, the rule of the people by the people.</SPAN></I></B><BR><BR>Finally,
too much of this thread misconceives that multi-stakeholderism is not democratic
if it doesn't represent all the people, and that if participants in
multi-stakeholder processes are anything less then everybody, they are
"elites". This reflects a very shallow conception of democracy, which for
example excludes deliberative democratic practices where in which we attempt to
include all affected <I>perspectives</I>, rather than all individuals.<SPAN
style="COLOR: #1f497d"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><I><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'>[MG>]
huh? MSism by any of the definitions currently on the table (apart from the
bizarre flourish of calling it “Participatory Democracy”--I can call my cat a
dog from now to eternity that doesn’t make him any less of a cat or any more of
dog) doesn’t “represent” anyone other than those who show up or are allowed to
show up and through them the interests that they represent. BTW, I’m all in
favour of Deliberative (and Participatory for that matter) Democracy, the
problem is that neither of these bears any relationship at all either to the
current practices or “theories” of MSism.</SPAN></I></B><BR><BR>As noted above,
this can and must be done better than it has been to date. But that is no
basis for criticism of the political programme that underlies the promotion of
multi-stakeholder governance, which is really nothing more than to realise
democratic principles on an international level where nation states are no
longer an adequate fit.<SPAN style="COLOR: #1f497d"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><I><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'>[MG>]
huh? Are you saying that we create democracy by annulling it… we really are in
Orwell land. And why this pre-occupation with the nation state in this
context. Democracy began outside of nation states, certainly developed
within the context of nation states but is neither by definition nor by
necessary practice confined within the framework of nation states. BTW I
completely agree that there is no longer a particularly good fit between
democratic accountability and traditional nation state structures and as I
mentioned, in what I think was my first contribution to this thread, I am
extremely interested in collaborating with others in exploring alternative
strategies for democratic practice which better fit with the opportunities and
risks of the globalized Internet era.</SPAN></I></B><BR><BR>We are very
obviously at the position where there are ingrained views here that are not
going to budge regardless of how much back and forth there is on this list, and
that's why I'm glad that JNC now has their own list where they can advance their
models of state-based ordering, while the rest of can work on improving
multi-stakeholderism on other lists without harassment.<SPAN
style="COLOR: #1f497d"><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><I><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'>[MG>]
you can continue with your deliberate misstatements all you like, they just cast
a negative shadow on whatever else you are commenting on…
<o:p></o:p></SPAN></I></B></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><I><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'><o:p></o:p></SPAN></I></B> </P>
<P class=MsoNormal><B><I><SPAN
style='FONT-SIZE: 11pt; FONT-FAMILY: "Calibri","sans-serif"; COLOR: #1f497d'>M</SPAN></I></B><BR><BR><o:p></o:p></P><PRE>-- <o:p></o:p></PRE><PRE>Jeremy Malcolm<o:p></o:p></PRE><PRE>Senior Global Policy Analyst<o:p></o:p></PRE><PRE>Electronic Frontier Foundation<o:p></o:p></PRE><PRE><A href="https://eff.org">https://eff.org</A><o:p></o:p></PRE><PRE><A href="mailto:jmalcolm@eff.org">jmalcolm@eff.org</A><o:p></o:p></PRE><PRE><o:p></o:p> </PRE><PRE>Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161<o:p></o:p></PRE><PRE><o:p></o:p> </PRE><PRE>:: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::<o:p></o:p></PRE></DIV>
<P>
<HR>
____________________________________________________________<BR>You received
this message as a subscriber on the list:<BR>
governance@lists.igcaucus.org<BR>To be removed from the list,
visit:<BR>
http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing<BR><BR>For all other list information and
functions, see:<BR>
http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance<BR>To edit your profile and to find
the IGC's charter, see:<BR>
http://www.igcaucus.org/<BR><BR>Translate this email:
http://translate.google.com/translate_t<BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>