[governance] Nitin Desai's two groups

[linda misek-falkoff]

Dear Jeremy and Group,

Missing being there with you again - but appreciating the remote
participation channels; glad to know you are there *inter alia*  stressing
what I will phrase "Participatory *Processes*," which from a *Respectful
Interfaces* approach are themselves *Substantive* - based on key community
values.

Strong felt need occurring at current Information and Communication
Technology related events in NY U.N. environment;  more later on this...
keep up the great work, with thanks,

LDMF.

Dr. L.D. Misek-Falkoff
For I.D. here:  Communications Coordination Committee for the U.N. (NGO);
*Respectful Interfaces* Programme.

On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 6:41 AM, Jeremy Malcolm <jeremy at ciroap.org> wrote:

> I just touched on this at igfwatch.org, but I felt it was worth
> highlighting here too in view of the debate at last night's IGC meeting
> about whether we should on the one hand push the IGF to achieve more, or on
> the other hand stay quiet to avoid giving ammunition to the IGF's enemies.
>
> As you will guess it is my view that we would be doing civil society a
> disservice to stay quiet for fear of damaging what we have in the IGF as it
> already exists.  But what is more interesting than what I think is that
> Nitin Desai said during the opening ceremony.  In his view the contention
> over the appropriate role of the IGF is very much a live issue.  He stated:
>
> essentially, this is a dialogue between two groups of people ... and we
>> must face up to that reality. On the one hand, we have a group of people who
>> feel that the present modalities of management of the Internet are working,
>> will work, even in the future, who are afraid that any major change in the
>> way in which these arrangements are set up would compromise the Internet in
>> some form. And on the other hand, we have a lot of people who are dependent
>> on the Internet for their activities, for the economic, social, political,
>> whatever, who feel that they have to have a say in the public policy issues
>> which affect how the Net runs in this manner. These are essentially the two
>> groups who are in dialogue here.
>>
>
> So if we were to leave this campaign half-finished and concede it to the
> group who are satisfied with the status quo of Internet governance, in some
> sense that would be the end of the dialogue that Nitin Desai describes,
> leaving it as a self-satisfied monologue of powerful governments and private
> sector actors.  In that case, what purpose does the IGC see itself as
> serving?
>
> --
> JEREMY MALCOLM
> Project Coordinator
> CONSUMERS INTERNATIONAL-KL OFFICE
> for Asia Pacific and the Middle East
>
> Consumers International (CI) is the only independent global campaigning
> voice for consumers. With over 220 member organisations in 115 countries, we
> are building a powerful international consumer movement to help protect and
> empower consumers everywhere. For more information, visit
> www.consumersinternational.org.
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20081204/6e7125a1/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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