[governance] Reconciling Democracy & Multistakeholderism: Having a Voice vs. Having a Vote

[McTim]

On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 10:13 PM, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2011/11/3 "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" <wolfgang.kleinwaechter at medienkomm.uni-halle.de>
>>
>> this artificial disctincton between "voice" (for civil society, technical community and private sector) and "vote" (governments) in Internet Governance comes from an academic Ivory Tower.
>
>
> I am not, have not been, and am not seeking to be employed or even present in any "academic Ivory Tower."  Based on comments received and my own intent, I had thought I expressed myself rather simply, especially considering the complicated terrain of debates I was trying to distill into more clarity.
>
> In any event, Wolfgang, you are lucky to be as respected as you are.  This explains why you report (below) feeling little difference between a situation where you had a voice, and one with a vote.   The less one is part of the necessarily narrow group of people who decisionmakers learn to develop respect for based on expertise and like things, the more one is like a child, who has a voice but not a vote.


Historically, the way decision have been made in the "governance" of
the Internetwork, is that we don't vote, we reach consensus after
hearing all voices.

This is reflected in the IETF credo "“We reject kings, presidents and
voting...."


>
> Children have voices, but not votes.  Parents have voices too, and the only votes.  This distinction is not "artificial" it is absolutely fundamental to freedom and democracy.
>
>>
>> It depends very much from the circumstances and the concrete issue where the fine line between  between "voice" and "vote" can be drawn.
>
> Sure, any intelligent person can think of hard cases, or line-drawing questions.  The only words that can not be debated are the words of a strongman dictator.  (But that's not because the words and ideas aren't depending a lot on circumstances, distinctions, and line-drawing, just like "voice" and "vote" is if and only if we imagine harder cases at the margins.   Those always exist, in all languages.  Differences are ones of degree.
>
> People standing in line for a one minute chance to address a city council have a voice, sort of, but no vote.  Surely it's better to sit silently on the city council and suffer through the public comments, and be one of a relatively small number of votes, is it not?



Surely it is better to listen to all voices and have a consensus
emerge (or not).

Is that not the more democratic process?

At least my online dictionary defines democracy as:

"government by the people; a form of government in which the supreme
power is vested in the people and exercised directly by them..."

--
Cheers,

McTim
"A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A
route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
____________________________________________________________
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