[governance] Re: Draft IGC statement on Wikileaks

[Milton L Mueller]

Parminder
In the existing political context, where nation-states dominate governance and seem to be intent on not allowing the rest of us to participate in it, then YES, no government is better than an imperfect government. Decentralization of power among states has two virtues: it creates checks and balances among states, and it creates certain power vacuums which can be filled either through new institutions or through self-governance activities on the distributed internet.  

As one of the people who originated the call for a Framework Convention during the WSIS, I feel we have to draw back from that at the present time. ACTA, the increasingly reactionary US govt role in CIR governance, cyberwar and "cyber-security," the Tunis Agenda's fallacious attempt to reserve "public policy" for nation-states, and the current anti-MS moves of the UN/CSTD all make it clear that states are not reliable or productive partners in any effort to build democratic global governance. To call for a negotiated convention, treaty or framework _in the context of the UN_ - an entity that still has debates about whether the people should even be allowed to participate in its deliberations, is crazy if one expects the outcome of such a negotiation to preserve or enhance the freedom of the internet and the rights of the people using it. Those negotiations will be all about the interests of states. 

Indeed, after reading Jeremy's statement on Wikileaks it became clear to me that IGC needs to have a debate about tactics and strategy along these lines. 

--MM

From: governance-request at lists.cpsr.org [governance-request at lists.cpsr.org] On Behalf Of parminder [parminder at itforchange.net]
Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2010 1:55 AM
To: McTim
Cc: governance at lists.cpsr.org; Jeremy Malcolm
Subject: Re: [governance] Re: Draft IGC statement on Wikileaks

McTim wrote:

Prmndr, Lee, Ian, et. al,




I have a hypothetical question (that may not be so hypothetical, if
the actions by some re: CSTD are anything to go by).

If the governemtns of the world decided they would build a "framework"
of some kind re: IG, but shut out all non-governmental actors in its
development, would you all still be in favor of said framework
building?


McTim,

Also entirely a hypothetical response (framed as a question) bec I do not support a simple acceptance of the imperfect governance structure presented in my response.

Would you like to live without a government at all, or with a government that is not perfect, while keeping up all efforts to perfect it.

Either you are completely anarchist, or you have simply decided that the Internet and the new social paradigm shaped by the Internet is somehow, magically, a territory completely different from the world we live in and have known and it requires no political governance. This assumption of a large number of what often gets called as the technical community (though I never understood the real meaning of this term) is to me so basically faulty that it is difficult to engage with questions raised upon it, which, without meaning any disrespect, is the nature of most of your questions to me. parminder






____________________________________________________________
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