[governance] FW: TP: city government exercising policy on Google Applications / consumer rights / Consumer Protection Act / trial period

[Paul Lehto]

On 7/14/11, michael gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
> in my limited
> observation [CIRA] would seem to me by most conventional standards to be at
> least reasonably "democratic".

I'm published in the area of political theorists of democracy, so
perhaps I'm not clear.  Here's something I hope is ultra-succinct
relatively speaking, and shows why I'm not off base.

The very definition of democracy in modern times is rule by the people
(self-government), based on one person/one vote and universal suffrage
(all adults voting).

The very definition of aristocracy, as Montesquieu (one of the most
famous political theorists of the world since the 1700s, a Frenchman)
wrote, is rule by less than all the people.  (I.e. Rule by some
fraction of all the people, especially rule by an elite.)

Now Mike, when you point to a subset of the people affected by CIRA
(domain registrants) and note that they can be voting members if they
wish, but ignore the mere user who is also governed to some extent by
CIRA, and then call that exclusion "reasonably democratic", you're
really saying that a largish aristocracy is "reasonably democratic."

But no user encountering .ca domains and affected by the TLD policy
but who can not vote on policy like domain registrants or on directors
like Mike Gurstein or Kerry Brown would ever call a structure like
CIRA "reasonably democratic."  (Not if they took the subject of CIRA's
authority seriously, yet couldn't vote on it.)  Such a person would
say they have no vote, complain they are disfranchised using their own
words for that, and note somehow that they are basically ruled by
domain registrants and CIRA who do have votes and say.  CIRA and these
domain registrant members are the superiors of internet users (who
have no say) and this aspect is not "reasonably democratic."

There's lots of room and even necessity for compromise in the vast
majority of political issues, but not on the most fundamental issues
like democracy (or not), or freedom (or not) or whether or not you or
I should have a vote on things affecting us.

It's a simple definitional reality:  Because aristocracies by
definition are rule by less than all the people affected by laws, if
you take the fundamental parts of democracy like who can vote on a
piecemeal basis, and thereby give the vote to less than all the
people, you have, by definition the very essence of aristocracy, not
democracy.

To call this piecemeal aristocratic outcome "reasonably democratic"
because some affected can vote (registrants) and some affected can not
vote (users) is to put way too kind a gloss on the undemocratic and
aristocratic nature of any system that allows one big or small class
to vote, and denies another big class, like internet users, the right
to vote.  That's the CIRA model.

All the happy talk about multistakeholderism hides the ugly realities
of denying voices and votes to classes of people, while often giving
voices and votes even to some non-humans and non-voters, like
corporations.

The purpose of the Truman quote, and the purpose of *Truman's*
invocation of Hitler, is to show that we do not want efficiency unless
we agree on the process's end result or goal.  If the train is headed
down the wrong track, no rational person wants efficiency!  That
efficiency just sends us faster and further down the wrong track.

Nothing personal, as I said before, was intended by any of my
comments.  But Kerry Brown has taken offense nevertheless.  I am sorry
he has done so.  But I do not think there is any way out of a
conclusion that CIRA is a form of aristocracy, not democracy, and
because I believe that Kerry Brown believes in democracy, but probably
never went through analysis like the above, the implication that the
restructuring of CIRA in the way it is, is causing him to be
participating in a form of non-democratic corporate governance is not
just a charge that has a certain sting to it, but an unavoidable
conclusion once one knows the basic difference between aristocracy as
being rule by less than all the people....

Paul Lehto, J.D.

P.S. I fully understand the distinction you try to make with ex
officio members. If you re-read my message, I recall clearly intending
to draft that message to say these ex officio members had an enhanced
"voice" or right to be "heard" -- which they do have by speaking at
meetings and being recognized much more so than an average audience
member.  I did not say or mean to imply that ex officio members had a
formal vote, by definition they do not.  I was pointing to yet another
difference in relative political power, not on the level of actual
votes since ex officio members don't have them, but on the level of
who has access to time at meetings to get their ideas out, if they
wish to do so.  Clearly, ex officio members have a privileged status
with respect to that.  That is basically why they are ex officio to
begin with -- to hear from them based on prior experience, status,
etc.  So, while I think a careful reading of my text would be clear, I
do see how one could mistakenly conclude that I misunderstood the role
of ex officio board members.

I was appointed in the past as parliamentarian for an annual bar
association business meeting attended by most of the Supreme Court and
in which many of the states' best lawyers argued over various motions
and measures.  I only mention that to hopefully put to rest any
inference that I don't completely understand what an ex officio member
is, they are common in bar association membership organizations in
various states.

Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026 (cell)
____________________________________________________________
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