VS: "bridge", was Re: VS: [governance] Summary Report of IGF MAG

[Michael Leibrandt]

Dear Wolfgang,

This time I agree with most of what you said. But to me it looks as if you hesitate to make the final logical step: The idea that there are three distinct “stakeholder” groups – cs, business and government – is in itself a relic from the industrial age. Actually, in a world were consumers become investors (nice reading stuff: “Supercapitalism - The Transformation of Business, Democracy, and Everyday Life” by Robert Reich), and democratic governments at least partly fight for business interests, a non-hierarchical “one third for every stakeholder group” approach finally leads to a superior role for the business sector (that’s why our friends from the ICC are so enthusiastic about the IGF setting). Taking into consideration that business is a driving force for innovation and growth, I’m not saying that this is generally a bad development, but we should be aware that sometimes this might make it more difficult to defend public interest against economic interests (at least in my country the cathalytic converter for cars would not have become mandatory in a non-hierachical ms automotive community
).  

Michael

_______________________________________________________________________
Jetzt neu! Schützen Sie Ihren PC mit McAfee und WEB.DE. 30 Tage
kostenlos testen. http://www.pc-sicherheit.web.de/startseite/?mc=022220

____________________________________________________________
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