[governance] Parminder's exchange with Bertrand

[Eric Dierker]

This sounds quite persuasive.  But MM is speaking of getting together to control or guide --- why did he use the term "dividing up"?  This is the fallacy that begets segregation and the focus on differences rather than shared traits. This is the beginning of the great thrust leadership into battle as opposed to peace.
 
Clearly Olivier is drawn into these "distinctions" rather than looking for charactaristics of sharing. So MMs question is rightfully answered "your right Milton it makes no sense to divide up", regardless of your classifications the originating premise is downright antique.
Get with the global village kids!

--- On Sat, 2/27/10, Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com> wrote:


From: Olivier MJ Crepin-Leblond <ocl at gih.com>
Subject: Re: [governance] Parminder's exchange with Bertrand
To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Date: Saturday, February 27, 2010, 10:08 PM


I don't know about everyone else, but I am thoroughly enjoying the
discussion and I thank all those taking part - I've certainly learnt a
thing or two and put a few new authors in my future reading list. Best
part of it all, I recognise that some people have taken some serious
amount of time to explain their position, and I really respect that,
especially since this kind of teaching is free! :-)

Now I do have one comment to answer a question that Milton asked a few
days ago. I am unable to develop it as eloquently as others, yet I'd
like to throw it in the arena:

Le 24/02/2010 20:26, Milton L Mueller a écrit :
> And tell me how dividing up the world into "governments" (an institutionalized collectivity with guns) "business" (corporate entities based on trade/markets) and "civil society" (which overlaps with both previous categories and has no homogeneity of interest and no guns and no money other than what the first two give it) makes any sense. 
>   

I usually equate:

- governments: law and order
- business: economy and money
- civil society: conscience

Any social ecosystem requires all three to work. Take one out and either
the system will fail, tear itself apart, or reach an untenable extreme.
That's why I believe in multi-stakeholderism.

Kind regards,

Olivier

-- 
Olivier MJ Crépin-Leblond, PhD
http://www.gih.com/ocl.html

____________________________________________________________
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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100227/65a98a07/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

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