[governance] Netizens and citizens; Was Re: new TLDs?

Wed Aug 31 08:30:21 EDT 2005

Wolfgang
As always you expand and explain so well. Thanks for this. It makes
much sense to me, finally.
Jacqueline

On 8/31/05, Wolfgang Kleinwächter
<wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de> wrote:
> Dear list,
> 
> thanks for this interesting discussion, which helps to conceptualize the understanding of the global information society as a whole. Here is another point.
> 
> The concept of "citizen", although known already in the Greek and Roman times, was more specified and closer linked to "rights and duties" in the early days of the industrial age, the french revolution and the drafting of the US constituion. You have your "civil rights" by birth when you have a name and an identity. But it took 200 years that a majority of citizens understood what their rights are and that the "civil rights" are primarily "individual rights" (as the right to freedom of expression). And there is still a long way to go that really "everyone" feels as "citoyen". And many have already forgotten what their rights have been. But regardless of the individual perception, the civil rights belong to "everyone".
> 
> All citizens are also consumer. But the concept of "consumer rights" was developed only in the last fifty years or so. Civil rights and consumer rights are reflecting the political and economic insterests of individuals. Both are interlinked and inteddependent. And civil rights (and duties) as well as consumer rights are linked to a certain territory and are fixed in a national constituition and relevant national legislation.
> 
> "Netizenship" and "user rights" in cyberspace are, at least in my understanding, rooted in the concepts of "citizenship" and "consumer rights" but go beyond them. They do not replace them but do broadening their understanding by going beyond the "national territory". We all remain "citizens" of our countries, but if we get a "name" and an "identity" for the virtual communication in cyberspace, we becoming global netizens. And we want to have the same civil rights also in cyberpace, not only in our own country but everyhwere. The same problem comes with the relationship between "consumer" and "user". As an Internet user, you want to have your "user rights" everyhwhere. Also here, the poltical and economic dimensions are not in contrast but are fit together. Insofar it is important to connect the "netizenship" debate with the discussion on the future development of the DNS. The DNS has both a political and economic dimension and it is also a source for identitity building in cyberspace
> 
> We all know that the nationstate and national governments will not disappear within the 21st century, but we see a process of powershifting and the emergence of new (global) constituencies, operating beyond national and international governmental structures on the global level. While in the "industrial age" the main actor was the "national government" acting on behalf of the "nation state", in the "information age" you have more and new actors, in particular on the global level. The Internet has removed the traditional barriers of time and space and insofar it also undermined the clear organizational structure of the industrial age, which was based on "frontiers". So what we have are areas with frontiers and areas without frontiers. And what we have to do is to find a right balance and innovative forms of co-existence between these different worlds.
> 
> What WSIS (and WGIG) is anticipating with its "multistakeholderism" is a model of "co-regulation" or "co policy development" which is at this moment neither conceptualized theoretically nor practisized anywhere. It is an exploration of new (social) territory.
> 
> Best
> 
> wolfgang
> 
> 
> ________________________________
> 
> Von: governance-bounces at lists.cpsr.org im Auftrag von Jacqueline Morris
> Gesendet: Mi 31.08.2005 00:04
> An: Ronda Hauben
> Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org; jeanette at wz-berlin.de
> Betreff: Re: [governance] Netizens and citizens; Was Re: new TLDs?
> 
> 
> 
> >From all the discussion, seems to me that the term netizen is being
> used to refer to activists in the Internet space. i.e. people with a
> common mindset and goal, "a community or social purpose and  that they
> would be active to support that purpose" .
> Which is an exclusive club. Most citizens around the world are not
> activist, and do not share a common mindet and/or goal, nor do they
> often have a community or social purpose.  So the netizen, like the
> citizen activist, is a special breed.
> 
> So basically, I agree with Jeanette and Avri that the term is not
> inclusive of all the people who are online and use the resources of
> the Internet, and certainly is not inclusive of the ones who are not
> yet online. Suppose they come online and decide not to be activist?
> Would they not be netizens and have the rights afforded to such (if
> the language goes into the WSIS?)
> 
> Also, in the citizen space, there are many who do not actively
> advocate, but support by economic means (don't shop at Walmart and pay
> a bit more to support local small business for example). These may
> equate to those who in the push for open source software, would pay to
> support open source projects (e.g. Linux) rather than Microsoft (as
> long as it's easy enough to do so). So, commercial interests can be a
> form of activism.
> 
> In general, I've found that self-interest is the most sure motivator
> for most people. Very few are totally (or even partially) altruistic
> (when you really analyse their motives). So I also disagree with the
> negative color with which  this discussion has painted such
> self-interest. Seems a bit idealistic and exclusionary to me.
> 
> Idealism is wonderful, but commercialism to an extent, as well as
> self-interest, has driven the recent massive growth of internet use.
> Coming from a developing country, use of ICTs is pushed by economic
> factors  - in Trinidad, we use VOIP to save $$ when calling abroad -
> if the phone rates were lower, a lot of people wonldn't go to the
> trouble of using VOIP. A big Government push in community/household
> computer ownership was lobbied for by the computer salespeople.  So
> the commercial interests did assist to an extent. If Google makes the
> net easier to use so that activists can get information easier and
> faster, is it a bad thing that they primarily do so to make money for
> themselves?
> 
> My $0.02
> 
> Jacqueline
> ______________________
> Jacqueline Morris
> www.carnivalondenet.com
> T&T Music and videos online
> 
> _______________________________________________
> governance mailing list
> governance at lists.cpsr.org
> https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance
> 
> 
> 

-- 
______________________
Jacqueline Morris
www.carnivalondenet.com
T&T Music and videos online

_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
governance at lists.cpsr.org
https://ssl.cpsr.org/mailman/listinfo/governance