[governance] Hmmmm... Google: "Internet Freedom!"... (from taxes?

[Riaz K Tayob]

I do not mind the response Milton.

However, if anything was ad hominem then this is it. There are 
substantive challenges to you, not only from me, as well an explanation 
of how I locate you politically.

And as for hurling epithets, then well don't give (as good) unless you 
can take it.

There is a need to discuss and thrash these matters out. But if you 
cannot engage substantively, then you are right there is not a point to it.

Riaz



On 2012/12/06 04:02 PM, Milton L Mueller wrote:
>
> Riaz,
>
> Like Parminder, you’ve overused this charge of “American 
> exceptionalism,” to the point where it reflects more on you than on 
> the target. Indeed if you, like Parminder, apply it to me it shows 
> that you are completely ignorant of my writings on the subject or that 
> you are simply hurling a blanket epithet at whoever is standing 
> around, whenever they disagree. So, no point in discussing further.
>
> *From:*governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org 
> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] *On Behalf Of *Riaz K Tayob
> *Sent:* Wednesday, December 05, 2012 4:06 PM
> *To:* governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Dominique Lacroix
> *Subject:* Re: [governance] Hmmmm... Google: "Internet Freedom!"... 
> (from taxes?
>
> Frankly I am not sure what kind of institutionalist Milton is. This is 
> not the Alexander Hamilton, Daniel Rayomond, Richard Ely, E Pershine 
> Smith, Frederich List and JK Galbraith, who all had a keen head for 
> facts and history.
>
> Britain used free trade ideas as a means to maintain its dominance 
> over other nations. The workshop of the world that encouraged everyone 
> to liberalise, that free trade (and then classical economics) was 
> best. And in the Pax (?) Americana, neoclassical economics (in 
> infinite disguises) and the Washington Consensus serves the same 
> function.
>
> Now I have no truck disagreeing with Mueller on economics - these 
> approaches differ in method as well as context, so there is room for 
> disagreement. But on the politics of the matter (sorry Milton, for 
> some Institutionalists if it is relevant then it must be included in 
> the "calculation") Milton, with what I surmise from his 
> Institutionalism - not having read all his work, is no different from 
> American Exceptionalists on this list. Of course I am aware that in 
> the American context(where what passes for progressive is quit 
> different, this may well be the case. It simply cannot be generalised.
>
> And in the "competition" through subsidised efforts Europe builds 
> capabilities - both the tech no-(harware) and -ology (its people). One 
> of the key elements of benefiting from a network is that skills can be 
> diffused. Consumption of technology rich goods is not the same as 
> producing them. Actually in a reverse sort of way the status quoists 
> (exceptionalists, Institutionalists of a special type, neoliberals, 
> etc) seek to maintain the US dominance by playing to that nations 
> comparative advantage - also in institutions like ICANN and the posse 
> that goes with it.
>
>
> On 2012/12/05 10:25 PM, Dominique Lacroix wrote:
>
>     Le 05/12/12 20:26, Milton L Mueller a écrit :
>
>         "Frankly", development of the TCP/IP protocols were supported
>         by military research contracts, which had no intention of
>         supporting a commercial industry. "The Internet" spread to the
>         general population and succeeded because of telecommunications
>         liberalization and a free market.
>
>     Dear Milton, you seem a little dizzy. You skipped merrily the NSF
>     action in the 1981-1995 years...
>     And then, also, the CIA action, via the In-Q-Tel venture capital
>     firm, launched in 1999.
>     And also the military orders in the advanced IT field.
>     Perhaps I forget something. I'm also a bit dizzy...
>
>     The government played an important role in facilitating that
>     process by privatizing control and paving the way for competition
>     among ISPs. There is no doubt about that.
>
>     Exact. And not enough: Google should be prosecuted for dominance
>     abuse.
>
>     While we are being frank, perhaps you can tell me how successful
>     European efforts to subsidize search engine technology to compete
>     with Google has been?
>
>     I assume you already heard about the networks effect that gives an
>     advantage to the first big player.
>     That's exactly why China and other countries protect their
>     boundaries in order to help their IT industry to find existence.
>
>     Do you think that Europe also ought to close their virtual boundaries?
>
>     @+, Dom
>
>
>     Please frankly, Milton, did internet begin in the US by free
>     market or by the US Gov action?
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20121206/613df148/attachment.htm>
-------------- 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