[bestbits] FW: [governance] Tweedledum and Tweedledee WAS Re: Time-sensitive: 24 hour sign on period for ITU Plenipot joint recommendations

[McTim]

remake the governance of the global (Internet)Comments inline

On Sat, Oct 25, 2014 at 10:52 AM, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
> Inline…
>
>
>
>
> On 24/10/2014 12:48 pm, Ian Peter wrote:
>
<snip>
>
> [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

sure there is, you just ignore them.  Sala just posted yet another.


> 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.

NO, the opposite is true.  The internet is cooperatively coordinated
by a series of MS entities and processes.  It is those who insist that
gov't be in charge that are trying to "remake the governance of the
global (Internet)"



> 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—

No, we just want to keep MSism as the dominant paradigm of IG, not of
any other area of governance.




>
>
>
> An extremely risky tradeoff by anyone’s measure and one that is particularly
> disgusting

slanging again.

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.
>
> 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?


Because by and large CS is in favour of MSism.  We saw that from WSIS
thru NetMundial.


>
> [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.


untrue.  If you had any experience with the "classical" as you call
it, you would know this.


> [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.
>
> 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.
>
> [MG>] you can continue with your deliberate misstatements all you like, they
> just cast a negative shadow on whatever else you are commenting on…


more slanging

rgds,

McTim