"democratic" (was Re: Summary of ways to participate in Best Bits)

[michael gurstein]

+1

M

-----Original Message-----
From: bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org
[mailto:bestbits-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Norbert Bollow
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 12:30 AM
To: bestbits at lists.igcaucus.org
Subject: "democratic" (was Re: Summary of ways to participate in Best Bits)

Gene Kimmelman <genekimmelman at gmail.com> wrote:

> I'd like someone to clarify how they mean "democratic" -- there are 
> many aspects to a democratic process and structure:
> 
> 1.  Do you mean "democratic" to reflect equal participation across 
> stakeholder communities, using open, transparent processes to debate 
> points of view and suggest policies/principes? And/or
> 
> 2.  Do you mean "democratic" to reflect a system of voting to make 
> binding decisions for the participants in a multistakeholder process?

I understand "democratic" to mean that decisions are made in a way in which
all ultimate decision-making power flows (more or less
directly) from the will of the people expressed according to the principle
"one person, one vote".

Anything which does not conform to this principle does not deserve to be
called "democratic".

I am honestly amazed how many people in Internet governance discussions seem
willing to compromise on this point.

Multistakeholderism is not democratic. But it is a step forward from those
governance arrangements where it is considered normal to deny public
interest representatives and ordinary people effective opportunities to
participate in the relevant discussions, while the representatives of
industry special interests are of course given such opportunities. And as
Jeremy suggests, multistakeholderism is something that can be built upon in
the context of pushing for real democratization. In fact I would argue that
my ECTF proposal (see
http://enhanced-cooperation.org/RFA/1 ) is a concrete proposal towards
precisely that objective.

On the general topic of democracy and its importance, I'd like to recommend
to everyone to read Amartya Sen's essay "Democracy as a Universal Value."
(Journal of Democracy, Vol. 10, No. 4, October 1999, pp. 3-16. The article
is available online at
http://www.journalofdemocracy.org/article/democracy-universal-value ).

Key passages include the following:

* "What exactly is democracy? We must not identify democracy with
  majority rule. Democracy has complex demands, which certainly include
  voting and respect for election results, but it also requires the
  protection of liberties and freedoms, respect for legal entitlements,
  and the guaranteeing of free discussion and uncensored distribution
  of news and fair comment. Even elections can be deeply defective if
  they occur without the different sides getting an adequate
  opportunity to present their respective cases, or without the
  electorate enjoying the freedom to obtain news and to consider the
  views of the competing protagonists. Democracy is a demanding system,
  and not just a mechanical condition (like majority rule) taken in
  isolation." (pp. 9-10)

* "Democracy's claim to be valuable does not rest on just one particular
  merit. There is a plurality of virtues here, including, first, the
  /intrinsic/ importance of political participation and freedom in human
  life; second, the /instrumental/ importance of political incentives in
  keeping governments responsible and accountable; and third, the
  /constructive/ role of democracy in the formation of values and in the
  understanding of needs, rights, and duties." (p. 11)

Greetings,
Norbert