<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On Friday 18 December 2015 10:19 PM, Garth Graham wrote:<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BB2A0EAC-0857-4AE2-B44E-568BE2336507@telus.net"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Dec 17, 2015, at 8:14 AM, anita <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:anita@itforchange.net"><anita@itforchange.net></a> wrote:
Pl find the link to a video clip and the corresponding transcript here: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.itforchange.net/UNGA_WSIS10">http://www.itforchange.net/UNGA_WSIS10</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Parminder concludes:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">…. left to itself the digital-network phenomenon will certainly be appropriated by the powerful and will result in an even more unequal and unfair world…
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
Whereas I would conclude: Left to a "democratic mechanism for global governance of the Internet” the digital-network phenomenon will certainly be appropriated by the democratic mechanism’s representatives Centralizing the governance of a distributed system makes it far more subject to capture than by any other method.</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Garth, thanks for your engagement. Let me raise some questions about
what to me seems to be somewhat convenient assumptions that we
employ - and are employed above - in dismissing the case of
democratic governance of the Internet, and its associated
phenomenon. Due to paucity of time, <a
href="http://www.itforchange.net/sites/default/files/UN%20General%20Assembly%20WSIS+10%20Meet%20-%20Transcript.pdf">my
statement at the UN General Assembly</a> was able to address only
3 of these unsubstantiated assumptions, and that too admittedly in a
very summary manner. <br>
<br>
As I asked in the statement, how is trade less decentralised than
Internet, or education, health or livelihood practices (say,
agriculture)... All these have global governance bodies that have <i>not</i>
in the act somehow tied their decentralised nature into some
singular global homogeneity - which would be no less problematic in
these cases than it would be for the Internet. At the same time the
UNESCOs, WHOs and FAOs of the world have done great great service to
these respective sectors, through research work, capacity building,
standards development, as well as through soft and hard law. <br>
<br>
I think the same would be true for the the impact of the Internet
(and its associated digital phenomenon) on our social structures,
which is rather deep and wide. <br>
<br>
One main problematic assumption of course is that governance of the
Internet is often taken just in the sense of its technical
governance - of protocols, names/ numbers, and such, while much
bigger and much more important issues lie beyond, in social,
economic, political and cultural realms. Because of this
'problematic assumption' people are often talking past one another.
<br>
<br>
BTW, if you are such a fan of Internet's distributed nature, why
then have a globally integrated and centrally (technically) managed
Internet. Why not have a really federated Internet where different
communities have their own Internet which they manage as they wish,
and about which they negotiate inter-operability protocols with
neighbours and others as they wish. (Why then is this term
'balkanisation of the Internet' is about the worst possible in the
same discourse. It to be sounds like distributed, polycentric,
amorphous, and so on..) Just taking your 'distributed Internet'
thinking to its real and logical conclusions. I mean, just with the
US gov and big business calling the shots with regard to the global
Internet and in this process taking the cover of 'distributed
governance' is not a sham I would like to allow the powerful to get
away with. (Who decided that a generic name like .Book could be
privatised? The world's distributed public!? or the US's big
business and the reigning US political ideology and establishment.)<br>
<br>
Did you for instance notice that email service today is much more
centralised - more and more around gmail - than it was 10 years ago,
and have you thought of what is causing this, if not governance
failures . I am happy to hear your explanation in this regard. In
general, if you have clear and plausible suggestions about how the
current moves towards greater and greater centralisation of the
Internet can be reversed I am happy to hear them, and work with you
on them. <br>
<br>
I think that a good part of this is because the powerful have been
able to control the discursive spaces (including technical and large
parts of civil society) in this area, and check the emergence of
strong political forces that can seek people's sovereignty over the
Internet (and its associated digital phenomenon) .... Unfortunately,
they have done this in the name of terms like distributed governance
(that suddenly became very current about 2 years back) or
polycentric governance (Fadi's current favourite). If you really
what the know what is distributed, bottom-up and so on, go to the
people's movements in different areas, and forms like people's
assemblies and the World Social Forum, and ask them if they agree
with the globalisation's language of distributed, polycentric etc
when it is used to destroy legitimate policy spaces! I am doing
nothing other than extend that some logic to the IG space, where
this problem has taken an even more vicious form. <br>
<br>
It is in the name of 'distributed' that the WEF inspired Net Mundial
Initiative was set up, and now a Wuzhen Initiative is being spoke
of. Both global digital superpowers, the US and China, want their
own show in this space, which is understandable from their
perspective. But why should people really concerned with global
public interest and the interest of marginalised people buy into
their vocabulary is what I find surprising, and which I wanted to
put my finger on during the UN GA speech.<br>
<br>
parminder <br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:BB2A0EAC-0857-4AE2-B44E-568BE2336507@telus.net"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
GG
</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:governance@lists.igcaucus.org">governance@lists.igcaucus.org</a>
To be removed from the list, visit:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing">http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing</a>
For all other list information and functions, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance">http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance</a>
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.igcaucus.org/">http://www.igcaucus.org/</a>
Translate this email: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://translate.google.com/translate_t">http://translate.google.com/translate_t</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>