=?ISO-8859-1?Q?R=E9f?=. : Re: Re: [governance] Just for fun Question

[Nyangkwe Agien Aaron]

Karl

You are right, we are talking about Internet governance here. The
fright of an upsurge of class divide accruing from the debate on Dan's
trickish topic carried me ajar and the result is the mix up. I
sincerely apologise for that.

Dan

Same like you, I am a proponent of promoting nationalism or hegemony.
However, such nationalism and hegemony should be such that we arrived
at a "safer, kinder world" as one former US President, George W. H.
Bush once said.
My own analysis of the debate topic is that it will lead to "the
hegemony of place". And this will go contrary to what the Internet is
currently doing: striving to empower the disempowered of the current
world class divide.
Aaron

On 5/7/07, Dan Krimm <dan at musicunbound.com> wrote:
> At 1:29 PM +0200 5/7/07, Nyangkwe Agien Aaron wrote:
>
> >That being said, I believe that the prevailing modus operandi and vivendi
> >of the Internet calls for no debates (for fun) as Dan is urging.
> >
> >Let's not forget that hawks of classes (I doubt if Dan is not fronting for
> >them) ar lurking around and are eager to tap from strong ideas issued by
> >debates (just for fun) and propound their hegemony while perpetuating
> >their agenda.
>
>
>
> Hmm, I'm not sure exactly how to take these comments.  I'm not fronting for
> anyone, certainly (other than having a connection to NCUC), and I'm not
> typically in the business of trying to stifle debate (just the opposite,
> typically -- I have a hard time resisting opportunities to debate on topics
> of interest to me).  I am also a "long tail" guy, and abhor the idea of
> classes -- and I oppose policies in the U.S. that tend to increase their
> prevalence, especially policies that increase economic divides (which belie
> the myth that the U.S. is a "classless society" -- I am fully aware that
> this is a crock, and I am deeply troubled by that underlying truth).  You
> have apparently not bothered to Google my modest web site.
>
> However, I am ultimately aiming to be a realist when it comes to public
> policy, and I guess I see no utility in having people pick a location for a
> world capital (for the Internet, or generally -- note that I would discount
> such a distinction on principle, in the first place).  I'm also a voting
> member of National Academy of Recording Arts and Sciences in the U.S., the
> presenter of the Grammy Awards, one of the most pernicious popularity
> contests in the music business which has virtually nothing to do with
> genuine merit (at least in terms of voting process).  The symbolism of this
> location question seemed to me just about the same thing -- another
> popularity contest best suited to self-promotion of one sort or another,
> and more likely to divide us than to bring us together.
>
> Here's another answer to the Just for Fun question:
>
> Anywhere but the U.S., at least until we get our own house in order.  It
> would be presumptuous of me to suggest a particular location elsewhere.
>
> Okay?
>
> :-)
>
> But what is really more important than location is what the *political
> process* would be for broad accountability within any such capital.  Where
> in the world is political accountability in full force today?  That's where
> I would want the location to be.
>
> For example, the chief problem with ICANN is not its physical location in
> the U.S., but rather the MoU with the USG and the systematically unbalanced
> skew of its fiat-based "multi-stakeholder" structure.  Structure, not
> place, is most important in governance, when place is made less important
> by the very technologies of the telecommunication network itself.
>
> So my real aim was not to stifle debate, but to take it to a more
> productive (IMHO) context.  Talking about place just juices up the
> competitive dynamics, and encourages people to think about a "class of
> place" (or perhaps even a "hegemony of place") in the process.  I'm very
> uninterested in promoting nationalism or hegemony in any form.
>
> Dan
>
> PS -- If my intent were actually to stifle debate, it would seem to have
> been a failure.  That would be a good thing.
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org
> To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>
> For all list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>


-- 
Aaron Agien Nyangkwe
Journalist/Outcome Mapper
Special Assistant To The President
ASAFE
P.O.Box 5213
Douala-Cameroon
Tel. 237 337 50 22
Fax. 237 342 29 70
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance