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

[McTim]

On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 6:58 PM, Parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > So you are not only taking it upon yourself to define CS for this
>  > group, but you are giving me "limits" on what I can believe or say?
>
>
> The limit I spoke of was about how far one can stretch the meaning of a
>  term. You are free to believe what you will, but yes surely a CS group may
>  want to reach an understanding of what is civil society for the purpose of
>  membership of that group. We have had discussions on this list in the
>  context of people with governments, or even about those that are included in
>  gov delegations. Yes, of course there are "limits" in this context. And we
>  have enforced them in the past.
>  >
>
> > If that is the case, I will happily unsubscribe from this group, and
>  > spend my time exercising "power" by participating in the Internet
>  > admin bodies (which most on this list refuse to participate in
>  > despited repeated invitations) that are actively practicing EC.
>
>
> You may spend your time exercising power anywhere, but as a civil society
>  group we need to be able to seek accountability from organizations that
>  exercise monopolistic power, and for that purpose they themselves cant be
>  considered a part of CS.

Well, of course I disagree.

But IF you really think so, then you must, logically, admit them as a
4th stakeholder group!  After all, if they aren't clearly animal,
mineral or vegetable, they MUST be a new type of thing, and be given
equal representation.

-- 
Cheers,

McTim
$ whois -h whois.afrinic.net mctim
____________________________________________________________
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