[governance] Is This An Issue for Internet Governance/Internet Human Rights?

Thu Aug 4 04:55:20 EDT 2011

Dear Daniel,

Thank you for the wonderful analysis.
I support your veiws.

Warm Wishes,

Sea

On 4 Aug 2011 09:21, "Daniel Kalchev" <daniel at digsys.bg> wrote:

Paul,

Like I said before, Internet is different.

Internet is different, because for the first time in (known) human history,
there are no borders and everything/everyone is accessible for
everything/anyone. This is what all human rights principles try to achieve
-- it is a given with Internet.

What you call "democracy" is just an example of hierarchical governance
system. You elect somebody to take care for things on behalf of you. You
give up your own rights by submitting to that form of governance.
The principle is the same, whether that someone is your village's war
leader, your town's mayor, your King or your President. These are just
labels and no matter what the political system is, are just a form of
hierarchical delegation of rights.
Just as much as an King may not care about you, so can any President. With
the King, typically to remove them from power, you need to shed some blood
(or a lot), with a President, you use more "civilized" political tools -- or
not that civilized and somewhat bloody if you consider recent events.

Any political governance system will be "good", as long as everything goes
well. Again -- look at recent events in Africa.

Do you see significant difference for the ordinary person? Because I don't.

Internet has removed borders. It has already transformed lots of companies
(to more flat structure), killed others that didn't want to adapt, changed a
lot of governments.
Who could even imagine a service like eGovernment from any traditional
democratically elected government?

Internet is all about choice.

> Let's cut to the chase, then.  You've ignored my most important point
> that the *only* source o...
Like the majority elects a mayor, president etc. whom I have serious
evidence to believe is evil person, running for the office for illegitimate
reasons. But you see, I am from the minority, my voice is not even noticed
in the celebration of democracy...

That is, I did not submit, or consented to that 'government', but I am
nevertheless obliged to obey whatever they decide to put on me. How is this
different from your fears of commercial terms and conditions inpacting
someone who does not agree to them? At least with contracts, you have the
choice to not sign up -- not so with governance.

But back to your very question. I do not ignore or deny that the only source
of legitimate governance is based on consent. I state this in all my
comments. But I do not see what 'democracy' has to do with this. Consent is
consent and has nothing to do with democracy.

When you speak of democracy, what you consider democracy? The political form
of governance at say national level? Or the community form of governance
within a 'club'?

PS: On re-reading your question, another interpretation occurred to me:

Today, democracy is considered the only source of legitimacy, because it so
happens that the most powerful countries (governments) in this world call
themselves democratic. In other words -- they claim this because it suits
them, and their servants. Everyone is happy now.

Back in time, when kingdoms were the prevalent form of governance,
everybody, including the church claimed that the only source of legitimacy
comes from God and is given only to Kings. Everyone was happy then.

At that time and also much earlier it was postulated that the only source of
legitimacy comes from power -- being able to slay anyone around you gave you
the legitimacy to declare rules. Everyone was happy then.

> You cite various reasons for you to prefer non-democratic governance that
all sound in the area ...
Interesting, how you came to such conclusion? Could you explain? Perhaps it
is my limited command of the language..

> I had previously given an example of the pragmatic reasons a
bribery-practicing industrialist (o...
You need to understand, that ANY political system is bribery based. The
bribe may be different of course. Sometimes, the price will be just "your
name will be remembered as Nth President". I hope you do not believe the
myth that politicians are not human.

> The same can be said for any autocratic type of governance, including but
not limited to that of...
That Mussolini did bad things does not mean he didn't make trains run on
time. It may be that he needed trains run on time, for his bad things to
happen.

But how does the ordinary voting person care? :)
They don't care, as long as the bad things do not happen to them personally.

> 1. Where do you get your political legitimacy for your non-democratic
> forms of governance?  Do...
Any non-democratic forms of governance are illegitimate within a democratic
framework.

This of course has nothing to do with Internet, or with Governance as such.

I still have the feeling that when you say "democracy" you view ONLY
"democratic government" and nothing else.

In my opinion, Governments do not understand Internet and therefore cannot
govern it. If they are tasked to govern something that they do not
understand, practice shows they will engage non-democratically elected
parties and the whole talk about democracy becomes non-sense. It is that
simple.

Also in my opinion, Internet as such does not need such form of Governance.
Specific objects and activities within Internet may need Governance. Most of
these are governed already anyway. Most of these are private in nature and
not subject of 'democratic governance'. Some of these aspects are even
governed by Governments. Democratic or not, does not matter much in their
own area of power and control.

> 2. Do  you dislike democracy for policy or political reasons, or do
> you (which may be the same...
Democracy is an beautiful utopia, just like many others. The evil is in the
detail.

My standing on 'democracy' is very much neutral. I am just recognizing that
it is the current state of art in governance.

Of course, democracy has it's place. It is applicable in situations where
there is a need to elect somebody to represent you, because you are: unable,
do not care, not experienced, not interested etc.

Internet is different :)
Internet lets you have it as you like. You may have democracy, you may have
aristocracy, you may have dictatorship, anything. All at the same time.
Nothing of this will break the Internet.
Because the parts that make Internet are all private and because deep into
their hearts private people do not accept any form of governance, or are
subject to different governance regimes and because Internet has no borders,
you may have it any way you like. True freedom :)

Here is an example you will surely like: You happen to live in a
'non-democratic' country. But because of Internet you have the ability to
enjoy the results of what 'democratic' countries have done. You live your
virtual life there..
Sounds familiar? Could you imagine it the other way around? Because Internet
has no borders.

Like I said it long ago in this discussion: at the moment you have
democratic (or not) Governments control Internet, a new Internet will be
born. Then they will run to catch the new one again.

You probably do not understand my position. It is not rebel. It is not
anti-democratic.

Frankly, this discussion is not going anywhere. The main problem is that it
always revolves around "we want to (democratically) govern it all". You
can't. You just cannot govern the whole of Internet. Forget about this and
you may have success. Governance needs to be applied to specific areas and
each area may require very different type of governance.

Daniel
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a...
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20110804/19fd414c/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, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

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