[governance] Inputs for synthesis paper

Tue Sep 9 00:02:21 EDT 2008

Meant to be addressed to: Hello Ian and All, (Milton's opinions are well
respected. But this message is technically isn't a reply to Milton)

On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 9:22 AM, Sivasubramanian Muthusamy <
isolatedn at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello Milton,
>
> "right to have an Internet in ones own language"
>
> What if I say, "I speak Tamil at home, this discussion is an important
> public discussion, I demand an instant Tamil version in my mail box of all
> messages that everyone writes"  or what if I say "I want all
> intgovforum.org and all the collateral resources translated in Tamil in a
> Tamil website before this IGF is allowed to progress any further"? And what
> if I demand the proceedings of the IGF simultaneously interpreted in Tamil
> and all documents officially transcribed and published in Tamil? And in
> Spanish and Portuguese and American Spanish and Brazilian Portuguese and in
> Toda, the language of the Ooty mountains, in Sanskrit, in Tulu, in Assamese,
> in Kannada?
>
> There is so much to be DELETED in this draft.
>
> Sivasubramanian Muthusamy
> India
>
> On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 8:56 AM, Ian Peter <ian.peter at ianpeter.com> wrote:
>
>>  Well there might be different emphases in a womens rights movement
>> Milton and I don't think we need to demand the emphases be exactly the same.
>> But that and many other issues here can wait till another day.
>>
>>
>>
>> The important thing is that we seem to agree on the main thrust of the
>> submission. I've enjoyed seeing the differing points of view here but
>> perhaps now we need to collectively concentrate on getting the text together
>> – next week the ongoing debate can happily continue.
>>
>>
>>
>> Ian Peter
>>
>> Ian Peter and Associates Pty Ltd
>>
>> PO Box 10670 Adelaide St  Brisbane 4000
>>
>> Australia
>>
>> Tel (+614) 1966 7772 or (+612) 6687 0773
>>
>> www.ianpeter.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>   ------------------------------
>>
>> *From:* Milton L Mueller [mailto:mueller at syr.edu]
>> *Sent:* 09 September 2008 08:17
>> *To:* governance at lists.cpsr.org; Ian Peter
>>
>> *Subject:* RE: [governance] Inputs for synthesis paper
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>  ------------------------------
>>
>> *From:* Ian Peter [mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com]
>> *Sent:* Monday, September 08, 2008 3:42 PM
>> *To:* governance at lists.cpsr.org
>> *Subject:* RE: [governance] Inputs for synthesis paper
>>
>>
>>
>> So womens rights is a collective right? Indigenous land rights is a
>> collective right?
>>
>>
>>
>> No, unless you believe that the rights of woman are completely different
>> from the rights of men. In other words, patriarchal (or matriarchal)
>> societies that assign superior or different rights based on gender believe
>> in collective rights. Liberal societies that afford men, women and the
>> transgendered equal rights based ontheir status as individuals are based on
>> individual rights. So now tell me where you count yourself.  ;-)
>>
>>
>>
>> Indigenous land rights are more complicated. An individualist approach
>> would certainly recognize the ability of groups (e.g., publicly owned
>> corporations or even political communities) to own land, but see these as
>> extensions of individual rights (as Tapani pointed out). However, the
>> property rights of a very different culture may not be recognizable to a
>> modern legal regime, and vice-versa, and so it may be better to handle those
>> situations as a kind of special sovereignty. However, a collectivist
>> approach to property rights can just as easily work against indigenous
>> minorities as for them. I am sure you know the history.
>>
>>
>>
>> But for the sake of this submission, we obviously need to reflect
>> differing opinions. Can't we find a simple way forward here? Isn't it as
>> simple as a statement such as "while differing opinions on individual and
>> collective rights exist" within the context of the general request, which is
>> to make rights a main theme for Cairo? (which doesn't seem to be disputed)
>>
>>
>>
>> That's what I thought my original edit did. I'd be happy to delete the
>> line about how state-provided internet access might be used to violate other
>> rights, even though I think the point is true and salient, I recognize that
>> it may be a bit too in-your-face.
>>
>>
>>
>>   Internal Virus Database is out of date.
>> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
>> Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.6.0/1602 - Release Date: 8/9/2008
>> 1:22 PM
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/sivasubramanianmuthusamy
>

-- 
http://www.linkedin.com/in/sivasubramanianmuthusamy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20080909/cc5f9ecd/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