[governance] right to development, the structure of IGC and IG issues for march deadline

[Milton Mueller]

>>> "Parminder" <parminder at itforchange.net> 3/7/2006 4:14 AM >>>
>Milton, I am sorry to say this, but your rubbishing of the 'right to
>development' is alarming for someone who often leads CS interventions 
>in IG consultations. 

Parminder I think it's healthy for you, especially, to be confronted with some honest and well-considered challenges to your ideological viewpoints. 

Let's be clear. Development is a good thing. The issue is how to get there. I am challenging the notion that asserting a "right to development" contributes to development in any meaningful way. I haven't heard any convincing arguments from you to the contrary, yet. And -- sorry --  I am not going to let you substitute moral posturing for clear thinking. 

>And ideological debates are not un-necessary - they are the very basis of
>what we are doing here. The de-politicizing of IG debates is the reason of
>much of the exclusion (or keeping away) of many actors from these lists/
>discussion spaces. 

My friend, we are having an ideological debate, right now. And it is you who are attempting to short-circuit serious debate by implying that my comments are outside the proper bounds of civil society discourse. By all means, let us have an ideological debate. Don't accuse me of being the obstacle.

>And the right of development should be 'enforceable' by individuals and
>communities against all kinds of political entities - from nation states, to
>global systems. That was what we have been trying to do at WSIS, but you
>seem to have very different views.....

Perhaps you could give me a specific example of how a right to development would be claimed, adjudicated and enforced. I suspect you will have a difficult time. 

I understand what it means when, e.g., indigenous people claim that their lands should not be expropriated or polluted, but these are not "development rights" but simple assertions of property rights. I understand what enforcing such a right would mean: return of the lands to their rightful owners/stewards, or cessation of the pollution, etc.

I understand what it means when people claim that they should not be imprisoned for political dissent, or held in jails without due process, habeus corpus and other well-established procedural rights. I understand what enforcing such a right would mean: release from prison; avoidance of interference with their expression, adherence to procedural standards, etc. 

I understand what it means when people claim that protecting copyright or patent rights are inimical to the development of certain LDCs. I understand the counter-claims as well (that failure to protect those rights will reduce investment in technology). Whatever side you take on that question, framing the issue as a debate over "rights" makes sense, and it is clear how the rights would be asserted and enforced. 

Please tell me, if someone in a poor country, say Sudan, petitions a nation state (or something as vague as a "global system") for their "right to development" what are they petitioning for? who will give it to them? 

Is it a change in the government's monetary policy? An increase or decrease in the state's budget or debt? More investment in education? or should that money be placed in science and technology? Are they saying that the current pricing of energy should be changed? Up or down--which price movement will have better long-term consequences for the development of the economy? All such changes would affect a society's development. All would interact in complex ways. 

Or is the right to development just a request for a bag of cash? Is that all you mean? If so, is that really "development," or just a static transfer of wealth? If you give the bag of cash to that person, what about the other 800 million people who'd also like one? Where does the cash come from? What other activities, investments, people will it be taken away from? Are you sure you have enough to supply alll the claimed "development" rights? What if some of the people who get the bag of cash handle it unwisely? Do they get to petition for another one, based on their right to development? How will the people who saved theirs and made it grow react to that? 

Really, I am quite curious to learn more about how a "right to development" is articulated, claimed and enforced. Perhaps you can fill me in with some specifics. 

>What is it that we really share to be working as a group. 
>At no other CS forum or grouping at global advocacy level have I 
>seen such a lack of clarity on the bare minimum basic unifying ideological 
>issues. 

If you want to claim the mantle of "civil society" you'd better get used to the idea that _real_ CS is vast and diverse - ideologically as well as culturally, politically, etc. 





Dr. Milton Mueller
Syracuse University School of Information Studies
http://www.digital-convergence.org
http://www.internetgovernance.org


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