<div dir="ltr"><p class="MsoNormal">Colleagues and friends,</p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I have been “listening” carefully over the last few days, since Wolfgang's "Why?". I
also deplore the apathy and antagonism that seem to characterise the IGC now. I
had hoped that, left to itself, the list would re-find balance and harmony for
the sharing of ideas. Apparently I was wrong.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><br></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It is distressing that both Bestbits and JNC, having each decided
that they preferred to come together with likeminded persons, should both then
decide to use IGC as a battleground. This list (IGC) grew out of an awareness
of diversity of opinion in civil society, and a recognition that there needed
to be a space for objective discussion without rancour of these very diverse
ideas in the hope of reaching some form of consensus, or at least of
understanding one another.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><br></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Earlier this week I was present at a meeting locally at
which a venerable and respected NGO (turned 60 last year) was probably killed
by people shouting for democracy. What was needed was that everyone should work
together to clear up a rather dirty mess that had been created. The shouting
meant that most people left. “Demos” is surely about “everyone”. In the same
way the term “multistakeholder” ten years ago in Tunis was a great victory,
gaining entry for civil society. Now it can be seen that it gave access to
other groups as well, some of them powerful enough now to drown out the voice
that civil society had gained.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><br></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Words are very powerful, and arguing about them takes a lot
of energy, but meanwhile life goes on. And there are things to be done that
need doing. And for that we need effective participation and discussion. In
fact we need a version of the “multistakeholder” model we keep arguing about,
only this time a “multiperspective” model. And we need to find a way to come
together again, because united we have more power than we seem to realise.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><br></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">At the Bestbits meeting in Istanbul last year I asked why we
seemed to accept and propagate the external opinion that civil society is
powerless, dependent; why not instead present ourselves as a force to be
reckoned with, which in fact we are. People seemed to agree. In 2007 in Puerto
Rico, at an ISOC meeting held during ICANN 29, when the funding for the newly
established Fellowship programme was questioned by a member of the ICANN Board,
the very quiet voice of an ISOC member from France pointed out that in fact “we”,
the users, supply all of the funding and so the matter is one of entitlement
rather than of charity.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><br></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So let’s regroup so that we can present a common front and
so that “they’ll see how beautiful (and powerful) [we] are, and be ashamed”
(with apologies to Langston Hughes)</p><p class="MsoNormal"><br></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Deirdre</p><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="gmail_signature">“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979</div>
</div>