[governance] 'search neutrality' to go with net neutrality

[Parminder]

Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <F9A5545095B749C0A18CABB699E483FD at userPC>, at 05:28:08 on
> Thu, 7 Jan 2010, Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> writes
>   
>> Well, as Margaret Thatcher (in)famously said at one point, "there is no
>> society" (and thus presumably no "social/public interest") and then she and
>> her accolytes proceeded to ensure through policy and process that her wish
>> was made flesh to the continuing detriment of all.
>>     
>
>         "I think we've been through a period where too many people have
>         been given to understand that if they have a problem, it's the
>         government's job to cope with it. 'I have a problem, I'll get a
>         grant.' 'I'm homeless, the government must house me.' They're
>         casting their problem on society. And, you know, there is no
>         such thing as society."
>
> So it's nothing to do with "social/public interest", but whether or not
> people can expect a magic financial crutch to support them in their
> adversity. It's almost exactly the same set of issues as the current USA
> healthcare debate.
>   

How we see it greatly depends on whether one sits over decades and 
generations of structural advantages, built often through through unjust 
and even illegal means, or whether one is at the wrong end of 
socio-economically exploitative structures. I think it is too easily 
assumed that all of us who do not need these 'magic crutches' are 
somehow special and we deserve what we have, and those who do not have 
all what we have deserve it too. Thats an ideology. And there is another 
ideology opposed to this one which believes that there is at present 
large scale social injustice which has to be corrected by strong 
positive measures for social justice - which often involves 
redistributive measures which you call as 'magic financial crutch'.
> I wonder how many people on this list would wish that governments got
> themselves organised, and [attempted to] sort out all the perceived ills
> on the Internet, on the grounds that they believe the current mechanisms
> were failing their collective citizens?
>   
or maybe the question is

How many on the list believe that the Internet, in the directions that 
it is taking, may exacerbate entrenched structural advantaged and 
disadvantages, It is therefore important to have pulbic interest 
policies to ensure "realization of internationally agreed human rights, 
social equity and interdependence, cultural concerns, and both social 
and economic development" (from IGC's charter). And such policies are 
only possible if there are adequate public policy mechanisms, and 
therefore such mechanisms should be organised as soon as possible before 
it is too late. Obviously governments will have to play an important in 
any such mechanisms, but these mechanisms should be much more widely 
participative, follow global HR and other socio-political norms, be 
based on clearly articulated principles (constitutionalism) and not be 
ad-hoc, transparent and involve a strong role of civil society 
organizations.


BTW, would like to have an IGC vote between the two propositions. We can 
propose a question - which of the two formulations in your view more 
correctly describes the situation vis a vis the current evolution of the 
Internet, need (or not) for public policies, and the role of governments 
in this relation.

parminder
> And that, Ladies and Gentlemen, is most of the IG debate in a nutshell.
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20100108/94b77874/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