[governance] Comments on Rio - Suggestions for Delhi - main

[Parminder]

> When you get a large number of the participants in these organizations
> (large enough to be a non trivial percentage of the participants) having
> solid CS credentials, and most of the rest with attitudes that approximate
> to "california liberal".. you might find it wiser to recognize those
> associations as CS

Most immediately post colonial govs have majority participants having 'solid
CS credential' - eg, India, and much more recently, S Africa. Are you
inclined to consider these governments as a part of CS. Most Indian local
gov bodies consist primarily of first timer non-professional politicians,
should we call these local bodies civil society.

Pl use some clearer criterion for CS. It certainly is important for those
who take CS organizations and activity seriously. 


and most of the rest with attitudes that approximate
> to "california liberal".. you might find it wiser to recognize those
> associations as CS

Good you referred to this ideology. I figure you mean 'Californian
ideology'. I know most of them are of this ideology, and that's exactly my
problem. Meanwhile it is amusing that you seem to expect me to accept them
because you tell me that they are of this ideology. My problem is precisely
with the neo-liberal slant of this ideology, and that through the
representation of, what likes to be called, the tech community this ideology
gets (illegitimately) over-represented in IG bodies, and gives strength to
the pervasive neo-liberal march. I expect you to be surprised that most
'development' civil society bodies consider this neo-liberal onslaught as
one of the primary issues to confront.  

> A trade union for, say, an airport's air traffic control employees, or a
> city transit union with bus and metro rail drivers, has a similar
> monopolistic hold over services at a large airport or a city. Ever been in
> calcutta during one of those periodic bangla bandhs the communist govt
> affiliated trade unions love to call all the time?

But don't you consider all this exercise of power as illegitimate. Are you
suggesting ICANN's power can similarly be considered illegitimate. 

> Your argument still doesnt hold. And even if it does its a dangerous trend
> you are advocating. And theres a slippery enough slope for other
> stakeholders to start excluding CS if you advocate such limits.


But do you appreciate how slippery a slope you are putting world's CS sector
and their activities and possible impact on, by such liberal abuse of the
meaning of the term. Try speaking to any development NGO about this, or if
you have more connections in developed countries any NGO involved with media
reform activities, for instance.

Parminder 



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:suresh at hserus.net]
> Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 9:49 PM
> To: Parminder
> Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org; 'McTim'
> Subject: Re: [governance] Comments on Rio - Suggestions for Delhi - main
> 
> Parminder [14/02/08 21:35 +0530]:
> >But I thought I had made a clear distinction between some people involved
> >with these organization (though their centrality to the power structure
> >within these organizations will still be an important issue) being CS and
> >these organizations themselves being considered a  part of CS. Is there
> not
> >a huge difference between these two formulations.
> 
> When you get a large number of the participants in these organizations
> (large enough to be a non trivial percentage of the participants) having
> solid CS credentials, and most of the rest with attitudes that approximate
> to "california liberal".. you might find it wiser to recognize those
> associations as CS
> 
> A trade union for, say, an airport's air traffic control employees, or a
> city transit union with bus and metro rail drivers, has a similar
> monopolistic hold over services at a large airport or a city. Ever been in
> calcutta during one of those periodic bangla bandhs the communist govt
> affiliated trade unions love to call all the time?
> 
> Your argument still doesnt hold. And even if it does its a dangerous trend
> you are advocating. And theres a slippery enough slope for other
> stakeholders to start excluding CS if you advocate such limits.


____________________________________________________________
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