[governance] Inputs for synthesis paper

[Jeffrey A. Williams]

Milton and all,

  My response and remarks below Milton's...

Milton L Mueller wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Parminder [mailto:parminder at itforchange.net]
> > On another note, the language of rights is often used to develop
> > alternative conceptions to state centered notions of development,
> > security, culture etc
> > to move toward a more people-centric one.
>
> Interesting response, P.
>
> > The problem with global Internet
> > policy making is that it is not desirable to leave it to state-centric
> > notions. The alternative is that we propose a people-centric one which
> is
> > built on people's rights vis a vis the Internet. This is what we are
> > trying to do, and, accordingly, this debate is not an idle one.
>
> Agreed. But my main objection to your rights language, especially in the
> context of the UN system, is that it drags us into the muck of
> state-centric positive rights, based on a view of the UN system as a
> gigantic social welfarist regime that can somehow deliver anything and
> everything to anyone who demands it. The gap between that conception and
> reality of the UN system of course is unbearable.

Unbearable at least.  It may happen some day, but the world that
I now know isn't ready for such a concept.  The UN cannot even
support itself and many of it's member states are far behind on their
contributions for a number of reasons.  So as Gerry Spence is fond
of saying, "Where's the beef"!

>
>
> > (3) We can try alternative political frameworks. My view is that such
> a
> > framework needs to be based on, and built over, a strong conception of
> > human rights in the new Internet era. However, restrictive definitions
> > that serve those who are at present politically dominant will neither
> be
>
> To me, "people-centered" means individual rights because the individual
> is the one constant across nations, cultures, etc. I don't think
> concepts of basic, narrow but fundamental rights "serve those who are at
> present politically dominant" -- else why would states from Russia to
> the US be so eagerly and with impunity violating them?

Yes this is unfortunately a serious conundrum of huge proportions.  Yet
to espouse such rights isn't necessarly a bad idea and such language in
an "Internet Bill of Rights" could include such "People-centered"
rights,
but only as they directly relate or are operationally related to the
access
and use of the Internet.  For instance:  "Freedom of expression" would
be one such right.

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
____________________________________________________________
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