[governance] multistakeholderism

[Paul Lehto]

My "acid test for freedom" was developed in the context of elections
in the USA and elsewhere, and constitutes a direct application of the
universal laws we are basically agreeing on.  While you consider your
applications of principles (to the net) more concrete and mine more
theoretical, the fact is that mine, too, are directly applied to an
element of the "real world" where, as you say, lawyers are
"engineers."  The acid test for freedom is quite workable in the
context of elections to make people realize that (1) the ability to
"kick the bums out" is necessary but not always sufficient to ensure
freedom, but without it we know for sure we're not free, and (2)
"transparency" alone, without the ability to kick the bums out,  is
hardly enough - one must also have the remedies available to DO
SOMETHING about the information one receives through the "windshield"
of transparency (such as information obtained about vote counts via
transparency).  Without such immediate remedies, it is like sitting on
a railroad track in a stalled car with no "remedies' like a gas pedal,
engine and steering wheel.  As deficient as transparency (too abstract
a term, IMO) is in many contexts, by comparison globally we are much
more deficient in the recognition of remedies that can be utilized
regarding information obtained through transparency.

Having, hopefully, dispensed above with your statements that I'm too
much "in the sky" by pointing to a direct application of the acid test
with a better fit (in elections) than the acid test would have in your
judgment regarding the internet (a good start, but not concrete
enough) I"m satisfied that we are on the same level, even if operating
in different "worlds" for the most part.  Even still, here I am on an
internet governance list so I can't be totally in another world -
there's at least this overlap!  ;)

A difference (in experience) that remains between us is my report of
relative success in talking to people compared to your more
pessimisstic outlook on education.  For me, I don't consider what I do
to be "educating" in the specific sense of teaching anything truly
New.  Rather, I am reminding people of what they already know or have
already learned, and most importantly emphasizing its importance and
bringing it to the forefront of their minds.

With all due respect to the skills of internet engineers, it's a
considerable advantage to be able to retain more basic non-technical
vocabulary as a means of communicating with people - at least to get
them to the basic territory with basic compass directions in mind, and
then to provide them with more specific info such as that you know
much about.

Paul Lehto, J.D.

On 8/23/10, JFC Morfin <jefsey at jefsey.com> wrote:
> At 00:51 23/08/2010, Paul Lehto wrote:
>>Seeing that we agree on the most important point *Your E-colonization
>>appears equivalent in essence to my "acid test for freedom".  the bulk
>>of the rest is mostly to the benefit of additional perspective (ir
>>difference therein) or experience, or addition of new angles or
>>insights.
>
> Correct. This is why I believe this can be an area of research.
>
>>Although you say you derive your fundamental principles from different
>>sources (internet binary "code" vs. legal "code") the way I 'hear'
>>what you're saying about the universal principles of the internet is
>>highly suggestive (to me) that your keen observations about the HUMAN
>>intelligence and creativity and behavior on the internet or in
>>relation to it is a language you can expertly read into evidence of
>>human nature, etc.
>
> Correct. The difference is that your source leads you to write in
> plain legal texts, while mine is to write it in plain standardization
> text, i.e. high-level binary code. Since it is about the same matter
> and that reticular writting is currently taking the lead on document
> writting, I suggest that more transdisciplinarity is advisable.
>
>>  That may not be the most global and precise
>>summary of your position, but the point I'm leading to stands
>>nevertheless, I think, especially since I've grounded it in my own
>>personal feeling!  :) And that is that you observe natural justice and
>>its corruptions via the most salient aspects of the internet, and I
>>observe them through not so much law (although that's included) but
>>political theory and philosophy on the nature of Aristotle's "politcal
>>animal" as "updated" by the ages.  But, if true, then that means that
>>we are aiming for the same star as our guide, and even though we
>>expect not to reach that guidestar, like a mariner without the stars
>>(compass and astrolabe) we would be lost indeed without the star to
>>give us direction.
>
> Except that I am a seaman and I do prefer feeling the hull of my
> cybship bold and stable under my shoes :-)
>
 --
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-2334
____________________________________________________________
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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t