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

[David Allen]

Throughout yours, there run (at least) two chords - the caucus and the academic (or academic point of view) within the caucus.  May I suggest considering two alternates? - the advocate and the neutral eye, for 'establishing the facts and perhaps also for analysis.'

In my experience, no one is actually neutral.  But all of us can work at - when we need that neutral 'truth' - seeing the other side / seeing all sides (and inviting others to fill in our blind spots, where we don't see).  And regardless of professional label, we may advocate (from an academic perch) or we may try hard to get at the facts (from some other perch) - myself, I find as much wisdom in friends who wouldn't go near an academic-by-name ...

Hence, the suggestion to parse between advocate and 'thinker' (or, doer and thinker).

In that spirit, if I may raise some additional questions, that yours inspire ...

At 1:51 PM -0500 3/10/06, Avri Doria wrote:
>Hi,
>
>I have appreciated the discussion on the right of development and it has given me a lot to think about.
>
>in thinking about this and was trying to understand a context for development rights. it seemed correct to me that a communinity would have such a right yet, i did not find a basis for it in things I had already considered.
>
>first, in thinking about it, i don't want to think of community as any particular region, like the South, or in terms of some sovereign entity, but rather leave community as any undeveloped grouping of individuals .

Someone earlier (Vittorio? - pls forgive any failure of memory on my part ...) pointed out that we are all developing, all the time.  So then it would just be a question of where we are on the curve, and at what rate and with what trajectory we are moving.  [See yours below on 'world wide parity,' or perhaps constant evolution - as a framework from which to see this?]

So in that vein, would relevant community indeed be all groupings who present themselves, for the question?  South, north or whatever (there is of course v widespread 'divide inside,' particularly for some 'developed' countries ... once the 'north' has a stake, they care!)

>
>my more naive thoughts see these as derivative from the other rights we do hold and have fairly universal agreement on - right to food, shelter, medical care and now, the recently declared right of information.
>
>the derivative aspect, for me, has to do with the fact that these other rights end up empty words without the method to obtain them.

So 'derivative' comes from whether there is any action, behind otherwise-empty-words? so then, actually all rights are in this spotlight?

>it is all well to say one has the right to food, but unless one provides food, or better yet, the means of growing food (agricultural development in a sense) there there is no way for a person to achieve what is their right. likewise with the right to information, without an infrastructure to obtain information what does it mean to have the right?

[turning back to yours earlier, so replicating it here:]
>other rights we do hold and have fairly universal agreement on

Parminder earlier pointed out that discussion of rights is fundamentally political.  You, here, point to 'fairly universal agreement.'  Are rights - and their basis - really agreement, among ourselves (increasingly writ large, globally)? perhaps about the best way to go forward, living together?

On the subject of 'agreement' as basis, especially noting Renate's succinct point to the UN Commission on Human Rights WG conclusion:

>The US even abstained to go against it.

We can see how, if 'agreement' is the basis, there can sure be a potential problem of empty words.  But agreement can also mean action, presumably the whole point?

>
>for the right of development to see any notion of being satisfied, there needs to be a corresponding duty to enable and provide development. finding the targets of this duty is somewhat more difficult. what places the duty on another community? it is easy to find the moral necessity, this is what motivates all 'charity'. and one can certainly see a requirement in the notion of compensation for colonial exploitation. but the developed world has shown itself relatively immune to the reasons of morality or compensation for the crimes of history. so to find other bases is the challenge i am struggling with. certainly treaty agreement that recognizes the general benefit of world wide parity, a pragmatism, could serve as a basis.

Again, 'agreement.'

>but how is this achieved?

God question!

>and certainly open discussion of the problems and solutions implied by such a right would be helpful.
>
>i realize that i don't really have an answer to the question of whether there are rights of development and how these can be substantiated in an academic sense. but in some sense it makes sense to me that as a caucus we consider advocating for the realization of such rights even if the basis is not crystal clear.

So the caucus role is for advocacy - doing?

>so what does it mean for such rights to be relevant to internet governance. i think this has to come in the guise of policies that enable development and in advocating for agreements that would aid in development, e.g. some reasonable response to international connection costs. i don't know if we need to actually claim such rights in what the IGC suggests at the end of March as topics (2 weeks now), but i do see this as a reasonable caucus motivation for arguing in favor of ICC as a reasonable topic. in other words, even if we can't fully substantiate, in the academic sense, the right of development, can the IGC be a force in seeing this presumptive right satisfied?
>
>and in the meantime, it is good exercise for the academics among us to develop the argumentation that substantiates the reality of such rights.

Or, is there also a neutral - thinking - role in the caucus, too?

>
>a.

[Appreciating that you have just responded to Renate, I'll start with this anyway.]

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