[governance] Tangential (On Exceptionalism Wikileaks) America's vassal acts decisively and illegally

[parminder]

John,

Since you came in on a matter of principle, I am propelled to respond 
for the same reason, on 'matter of principle'.


On Monday 20 August 2012 05:52 PM, John Curran wrote:
>
> I suspect I shall regret entering this discussion, but I must disagree with the
> assertion contained in above sentence, specifically:
>   
>    "American Exceptionalism, which is implicit in the CHOICE of supporting the
>     Status Quo of current Internet Governance arrangements ON THIS LIST,"
>
> For some of us, the choice of supporting the current status quo in Internet Governance
> arrangements is predicated on lack of a clear alternative which may be assessed on its
> benefits and merits, and a need to keep the Internet operational in the meantime.  I likely
> would support the status quo in Internet Governance of critical Internet resources even
> if it were anchored in a contract with Cthulhu, or at least until such time as a proposal for
> change came along which provided clear benefits and had a reasonable chance of transition.

The alternative is clear; a group representing all countries does the 
CIR oversight which is at presently done by the US. And the process 
ensures that no one country or even a group of countries can capture 
decision making involved in the role...... There is *no* doubt that 
oversight by such a multi-country group, with the involved principles 
and processes clearly defined, and the nature of oversight powers 
narrowly restricted, is a much much better system that US unilaterally 
exercising oversight, with no laid down law or principles other than its 
own interests (which can *temporarily* be to not meddle with the root to 
build a good reputation and a 'weak form of legitimacy' which seems to 
hold a lot of attraction for some).

Apart from much better insurance against meddling with the CIRs based on 
one country's interest, governance systems are also judged on their 
inherent democratic-ness, a point you seem to give little importance to.

Beyond these points, I am unable to perform some kind of experiment to 
show how the alternative is better than the status quo. You will realise 
that such things are not possible in political realms.

Since, the original subject is 'US exceptionalism', I am unable to agree 
with your claim that you would have been as comfortable it the 
arrangement was with Cthulhu instead of the US..... Cthulhus of the 
world are precisely the problem that status quoists have.... But if 
indeed you are happy to have the 'same contract with' Cthulhu why would 
you not agree to have the 'same contract' with a group of 'Cthulhus', 
which further guarantees that no single Cthulhu can do some rogue stuff 
?? This is a serious and direct proposal which you may want to respond to.

regards, parminder





>
> (Personally, the concept of any government exceptionalism seems to ignore the inherent
> nature of governments.)
>
> FYI,
> /John
>
> Disclaimers:  My views alone.  I disclaim that they add any value, so please do not try
> to tax them.
>
>


-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/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