[bestbits] [governance] Remarks at UNESCO Closing Ceremony of "Connecting the Dots Conference"

Michael Gurstein gurstein at gmail.com
Tue Mar 10 01:36:46 EDT 2015


One of the great speeches of all time... Maybe we should invite him to join
the JNC... :)

 

M

 

-----Original Message-----
From: bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net
[mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] On Behalf Of JOSEFSSON Erik
Sent: March 9, 2015 10:13 PM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Milton L Mueller; "Kleinwächter,
Wolfgang"; Norbert Bollow; wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at
Cc: bestbits at lists.bestbits.net
Subject: RE: [bestbits] [governance] Remarks at UNESCO Closing Ceremony of
"Connecting the Dots Conference"

 

Milton,

 

To my knowledge there are no "European parties" standing for elections in
any Member State of the EU. Yet.

 

There are myriads of permutations (or should I say perturbations) of
structures created by "political families" trying to link nations with that
sweet slogan "United in Diversity".

 

And as I said before, now even the CJEU has joined the discussion with its
Opinion 2/13, which transferred would fall in your category C).

 

For what it's worth, I'm all for motherhood and apple pie.

 

As another Charlie said, let us all unite in the name of democracy:

 

 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dGPo9XBIPA>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9dGPo9XBIPA

 

Best regards.

 

//Erik

 

________________________________________

From:  <mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org>
governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org
[governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] on behalf of Milton L Mueller
[mueller at syr.edu]

Sent: Monday 9 March 2015 20:34

To:  <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org> governance at lists.igcaucus.org;
"Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"; Norbert Bollow;
<mailto:wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at> wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at

Cc:  <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net

Subject: RE: [governance] [bestbits] Remarks at UNESCO Closing Ceremony of
"Connecting the Dots Conference"

 

Wolfgang

 

Throwing the word "democratic" alongside "multitakeholder" doesn't solve the
problem. It is more fundamental.

 

I feel like I've had this conversation about democracy with Parminder a
dozen times, if not more.

As I have pointed out repeatedly, and Jeanette did here also, the very
meaning of "democracy," much less its desirability, is completely unclear in
a globalized environment.

 

Current conceptions of democracy are based on citizenship in a defined and
limited territory, and institutions associated with territorial states that
verify citizenship, assign specific rights to them, define an electoral
machinery for aggregating the preferences of citizen population, and also
LIMIT the powers and scope of democratic decision making in order to protect
individual rights, and to maintain checks and balances on the various
branches of government.

 

None of this has any relevance to the global governance of the internet.
There is no global state, no global citizenship, no global constitution
dividing and limiting the powers that might be exercised by a global state,
etc. There is no machinery for aggregating and effectuating the preferences
of a global population. The territorial division of populations into
distinct units, even if democratically governed, creates its own
pathologies: one need only look at the increasing popularity of European
parties that favor restrictions on immigration as one of hundreds of
possible examples.

 

Hence, the appropriation of the term "democratic" by JNC can mean any of
these things:

 

A) It is a purely rhetorical ploy that trades on the fact that "democracy"
is like "motherhood" and "God" and no one can claim to be against it.
Decmoratic = good, and whatever is politically good is democratic. This of
course ignores all the pathologies of pure democracy

 

B) It is a cover word for the reassertion of the authority of existing
states over internet governance, which means not only "democracy" in the
classical 20th century nation-state sense but also the bastardized UN usage
which means one country, one vote, even if 2/3 of the nations voting are not
internally democratic

 

C) It represents a kind of naïve belief that the democratic institutions of
the nation-state can be translated easily into a globalized framework. But
if so, why do we hear so little about what form these new institutions will
take, how they will be designed, how they will avoid abuses of power? When
MG or NB talk about "democratic" regulation of Internet businesses (and of
the rest of us, inevitably), what regulators are they talking about and what
law do they operate under and to which courts are they accountable?

 

I suspect that their thinking is a confused mosh of all three of these, but
the immediate effect of their 'democratic' advocacy is basically represented
by B.

 

--MM

 

> -----Original Message-----

> From:  <mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org>
governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance- 

>  <mailto:request at lists.igcaucus.org> request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf
Of "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang"

> Sent: Monday, March 9, 2015 11:05 AM

> To:  <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org> governance at lists.igcaucus.org;
Norbert Bollow; 

>  <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org> governance at lists.igcaucus.org;
<mailto:wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at> wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at

> Cc:  <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net

> Subject: AW: [governance] [bestbits] Remarks at UNESCO Closing 

> Ceremony of "Connecting the Dots Conference"

> 

> Hi

> 

> I propose that all discussant agree now - after this bizarre 

> wortdsmithing discussion - on Principle 9.1 of the Sao Paulo Declaration
which states:

> 

> 9.INTERNET GOVERNANCE PROCESS PRINCIPLES: 9.1 Multistakeholder:

> Internet governance should be built on democratic, multistakeholder 

> processes, ensuring the meaningful and accountable participation of 

> all stakeholders, including governments, the private sector, civil 

> society, the technical community, the academic community and users. 

> The respective roles and responsibilities of stakeholders should be 

> interpreted in a flexible manner with reference to the issue under
discussion.

> 

> 

> It would be good if those CS Groups who had some reservations in Sao 

> Paulo rejoin now the NetMundial Initiative and contribute to the 

> implementation of 9.1.

> 

> Wolfgang

> 

> 

> 

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----

> Von:  <mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org>
governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von Norbert 

> Bollow

> Gesendet: Mo 09.03.2015 15:40

> An:  <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org> governance at lists.igcaucus.org;
Benedek, Wolfgang

> ( <mailto:wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at> wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at)

> Cc:  <mailto:bestbits at lists.bestbits.net> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net

> Betreff: Re: [governance] [bestbits] Remarks at UNESCO Closing 

> Ceremony of "Connecting the Dots Conference"

> 

> On Mon, 9 Mar 2015 12:12:42 +0100

> "Benedek, Wolfgang ( <mailto:wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at>
wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at)"

> < <mailto:wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at> wolfgang.benedek at uni-graz.at>
wrote:

> 

> > on the issue of democracy in international instruments like the UDHR 

> > and the ICCPR, it should be noted that democracy is neither used in 

> > Article 21 of the Universal Declaration nor in Article 25 of the 

> > ICCPR, which speak of participation in government of one's country, 

> > periodic elections etc

> 

> Yes, indeed. Where the principle of democracy is referred to in 

> relation to governments, in those texts the word "democracy" is not 

> used, but instead a very very central aspect of makes a society and 

> its government democratic is spelled out explicitly.

> 

> > The limitation clause in Article 29 UDHR states that rights can be 

> > restricted for the sake of the general welfare in a democratic 

> > society. As the UDHR is not a binding convention there is no 

> > authoritative interpretation of this phrase by an international 

> > human rights body to my knowledge.

> 

> Actually the phrase, with some variations (in which the word "democratic"

> occurs in a similar construction, and I would say, certainly with the 

> same

> meaning) is also in binding human rights instruments. In particular, 

> here are some references: ICCPR, Art. 14, Art. 21, Art. 22. ICESCR, Art.
4.

> 

> Greetings,

> Norbert

> 

> > However, in the context of the European Convention on Human Rights, 

> > the European Court of Human Rights regularly requires a "pressing 

> > social need" for restrictions which are possible based on the 

> > similar limitation clause "necessary in a democratic society". More 

> > and examples in my book with Matthias Kettemann on Freedom of 

> > Expression and the Internet, Council of Europe 2014.

> >

> > Wolfgang Benedek

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

> > Am 09.03.15 11:54 schrieb "Norbert Bollow" unter < <mailto:nb at bollow.ch>
nb at bollow.ch>:

> >

> > >On Mon, 9 Mar 2015 16:16:17 +0800

> > >David Cake < <mailto:dave at difference.com.au> dave at difference.com.au>
wrote:

> > >

> > >> Jeremy claims that if the inclusion of the term in descriptions 

> > >> of mutti-stakeholder bodies means anything concrete, it means 

> > >> retaining a special role for government (in, presumably, all 

> > >> situations, not just those areas like law enforcement that 

> > >> governments have a special role intrinsically by law). JNC denies 

> > >> that interpretation - so please, what IS your interpretation of 

> > >> what the term democratic in the context you discuss would mean.

> > >

> > >I hereby assure you that JNC has every intention of publishing a 

> > >position paper which will address this in some depth. I will post 

> > >about this when it is available.

> > >

> > >In the meantime, you and/or others might be interested in 

> > >reflecting on what is the precise meaning of the word "democratic" 

> > >in the context of the very interesting way in which this word is 

> > >used in Article 29 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

> > >

> > >Greetings,

> > >Norbert

> > >co-convenor, Just Net Coalition (JNC)  <http://JustNetCoalition.org>
http://JustNetCoalition.org

> > >

> >

> >

> 

> 

> 

 

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20150309/bb236e84/attachment.htm>


More information about the Bestbits mailing list