[bestbits] [governance] Internet - whether to regulate it or not
JFC Morfin
jefsey at jefsey.com
Mon Sep 29 12:14:13 EDT 2014
At 20:30 28/09/2014, Barry Shein wrote:
>I really don't get this "multi-stakeholder" model and don't see how
>it can lead to anything but what I describe.
Barry,
there is something we need to accept. The interrnet does not belong
to everyone: it is everyone.
This is why any strategy, behaviour, thinking which considers it as
something you can control outside of the others' people accepted
social forms of governance (administration, justice, police, society,
army, etc. etc.) will technically fail at some stage. People do not
want deregulation they want protection of their life, interests, liberty.
This means that when the US denigrates "governments", they actually
virtually invade their country.
They may see it as a "liberation" of the country's people, but the
"liberated" people - having this way got the liberty to purchase US
goods in US dollars - may not see it that way and retaliate in their
own different ways. It seems that for a couple of decades the US
should have understood it.
Now, the US are not the only would be invaders.
Others may also want to politically oppose the US interests in
illegitimate manners, and the US have an full legitimacy to counter
them or to prevent their agression.
This is the normal diplomatic process. The problem is that
globalization has raised the physical war threshold and replaced it
it by new forms of wars including brain washing, financial crisis,
cyberwarfare, cultural influence, righte and duty to intervene, etc.
and the time-space relation has made precautionary conterwars
something rather new we do not fully understand yet.
We have to accept that we are at war. And that this war is rather new
because it is global: eveyone is at war with everyone. This war is
also rather new because the engaged powers are public, private and
civil (some XIIth century kind of warring) with the economical and
financial emergence of new kind of sovereignties (Apple, Google,
Microsoft, etc. in our area). It enlists many mercenaries,
disembarking the in the meetings (i.e. battles of influence). Etc.
IMHO the solution we have is to keep ourselves outside of their
global coalitions, actions, battles, etc. and look at our local
interests, minding our own business rather than the ones of the big
network leaders, and protecting ourselves from their plundering. This
is why the VGN notion and management is so important.
They keep saying the internet belongs to every of "us" (us bing the
"stakeholders"', the net nobility)?
Let make it work as being every of us (the network commoners).
How that? May be can the techies on the list to join the
http://mycann.org effort to discuss the mycann-plug-in. Be you own
VGN master or member.
Some said "a client not a consumer".
Why to waste time and money at attending their meetings instead of
spending this time and money at being fee and self-protected ?
jfc
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20140929/fa8b117a/attachment.htm>
More information about the Bestbits
mailing list