[governance] USG on ICANN - no movement here

Fri Aug 8 06:28:45 EDT 2008

Parminder and all,

  FWIW, I didn't see or construe what you said as "more dangerous
than a clear authoritarian" or "kind of description/ labeling more
acceptable that "professes to a neo-imperialist ideology", as Milton
suggested.  I can only guess that this is/was Milton's ideology means
testing or a version of Miltons own, and perhaps shared, reverse
ideology argumentative form.  But again, that's just a guess.

  I thought your responses Parminder were spot on if my guess is
correct.

Parminder wrote:

> > There's an distinction between disagreeing with someone's views and
> > personal
> > attacks with epithets etc.  If we maintain it probably most will be
> > happier
> > here and the conversation more productive. Pretty obvious.
>
> Yes. Sure, Bill. But what is less obvious is why such pally-ness with Milton
> on this subject right at the time he wrote that email to Rui I quoted in my
> last email. How is "more dangerous than a clear authoritarian" kind of
> description/ labelling more acceptable that "professes to a neo-imperialist
> ideology".
>
> Can you make that too obvious to all of us please?
>
> Let us know why and how Milton's is a legitimate political critique, and
> mine is reprehensible 'labeling'. Please specifically reply to this. Because
> you tend to ignore such stuff when it suits you, and normally don't response
> to such direct queries.
>
> Also I ask you again (you didnt respond when I asked earlier) how is your
> labeling my behavior as Spartacus Youth Club-ish not similar ideological
> 'labeling' against which practice you speak so strongly.
>
> Especially when such labeling is done in the language and idiom of an
> in-group with no reason to expect that either the person at which it is
> aimed, or the vast majority of the IGC members, are likely to know what it
> means/ connotes (I haven't till now been able to get the exact connotations
> of the labelling, but that hardly matters, right, because the in-group got
> it and can have a chuckle over it.)
>
> (And if, as you said, a coordinator has to be extra careful in such
> labeling, don't you think the logic also extends in the reverse direction
> and more restraint may be needed in labeling the co-coordinator's behavior??
> Please reply.)
>
> I repeat that my use of the expression 'neo-imperialist view' was clearly a
> part of a political critique which I strongly believe in and hold to, and I
> consider the kind of personal language you have been using against me in
> this regard - "dipping in the gutter" and that "belligerent fight-picking" -
> very objectionable. I specifically ask you to desist from such language or
> you could be leading both of us towards the 'gutter'. But if you insist and
> persist, I am game.
>
> These are what are personal attacks and not the political critiques that my
> email offered.
>
> I have asked you a few times earlier to avoid superiority- posturing on this
> list (yes, this is a personal reference as the ones you used against me),
> which kind of behavior is more subtly (but strongly) and sustained-ly
> 'excluding and offensive' than the 'behavior' you came out against.
>
> Parminder
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: William Drake [mailto:william.drake at graduateinstitute.ch]
> > Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2008 12:03 PM
> > To: Mueller, Milton; Governance
> > Subject: Re: [governance] USG on ICANN - no movement here
> >
> > Hi MM,
> >
> > On 8/7/08 3:49 AM, "Milton L Mueller" <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:
> >
> > > While the epithet "neo-imperialist" may not be a productive way to move
> > > forward, Levine did not just talk about "powerful political forces in
> > > DC," he tried to defend the arrangement, and when asked what value US
> > > oversight added, he replied in a dismissive way that anyone who had been
> > > at an ICANN meeting had to conclude that it needed "adult supervision."
> > > Why is he exempt from criticism here?
> >
> > There's an distinction between disagreeing with someone's views and
> > personal
> > attacks with epithets etc.  If we maintain it probably most will be
> > happier
> > here and the conversation more productive. Pretty obvious.
> >
> > > That is why, ahem, IGP developed and proposed a workshop on the JPA for
> > > the Hyderabad IGF. Keep in mind that the progression is clear. USG can
> > > start by terminating the JPA, which doesn't cost it control of the root
> > > and still gives it life or death power over ICANN, but ending the JPA
> > > removes the most direct and egregious forms of US intervention. And we
> > > have made very specific proposals as to what conditions would justify
> > > termination of the JPA, although, like you, we are routinely
> > > disappointed with the level of attention those issues tend to draw from
> > > this crowd.
> >
> > While Iike all good citizens I normally commit all IGP utterances to
> > memory
> > (just kidding), and recall reading your NTIA submission, I can't say that
> > I've ever seen anyone really make the sort of case I was asking for.
> > There
> > is for example a difference between saying the JPA should be ended in
> > order
> > to depoliticize things and bring cheer to people who just don't like the
> > USG
> > role, and making a case that will resonate in the beltway, Silicon Valley,
> > etc that there are no significant risks to doing so in terms of security,
> > stability, 'foreign dictators asserting control,' etc.  WSIS-speak etc
> > won't
> > cut it, there are probably like five people on K St. or Capitol Hill who
> > could tell you what the Tunis Agenda says.  A compelling case would need
> > to
> > be anthropologically attuned to the tribal customs, communicative
> > practices
> > and collective memories of the target audiences, and promoted in a manner
> > that works in the local institutional ecology.  Or, we can just stand back
> > and say screw 'em, they're insular and don't get what people elsewhere are
> > thinking, in which case the prospects for change remain dim.
> >
> > Not defending it, just saying that's how it is.  There's an almost total
> > disjuncture between life worlds here.
> >
> > Bill
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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

Regards,

Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 281k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -
   Abraham Lincoln

"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is
very often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
ABA member in good standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail
jwkckid1 at ix.netcom.com
My Phone: 214-244-4827

____________________________________________________________
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