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

Fri Dec 7 02:27:37 EST 2012

Parminder, if you persist in using terms like phony to refer to McTim and then call the list police down on Milton for allegedly being rude to you, that's a case of the pot calling the kettle black. 

--srs (htc one x)

----- Reply message -----
From: "parminder" <parminder at itforchange.net>
To: <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
Subject: [governance] Hmmmm... Google: "Internet Freedom!"... (from taxes?
Date: Fri, Dec 7, 2012 12:39 PM

On Thursday 06 December 2012 07:32 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.
>

Milton,

Dont know why you are pulling me into this out of nowhere .... but if 
you want me to come in, here i am, at your service :)

(BTW, I must first say that I find your recent comments to Riaz 
extremely rude, and I hope that the concerned duty bearers are taking note.)

So, you object to the use of the term 'US exceptionalism'! You are on 
record asserting repeatedly that you think ICANN should continue to be 
subject to US laws, at least in the areas of regulation of non-profits, 
competition and FoE...... presumable more...... (in any case an entity 
is either subject to a jurisdiction, or it is not; there are no choices 
available for an entity to be subject to some laws and not others).

Have you not said so? Please do let us know if you havent, and even if 
you have changed your mind now.

In the above regard you dont even agree with those who seek, what I call 
as, 'phoney internationalisation' (McTim's case) whereby ICANN 
internationalisation is sought without being able to suggest any 
credible institutional basis for doing it. (You are perhaps too 
politically clued-in and can make out that such phony 
internationalisation without providing the political- institutional 
basis for it is simply not possible.)

You however do not agree for ICANN to be subject to international law, 
or laws of other countries (do you agree to ICANN shifting to New 
Delhi?) , and you want it to be subject to US laws. Now that is 
literately 'US exceptionalism', isnt it! I cant see how the term can be 
applied more accurately than in this case.....

parminder

> *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/20121207/6066192f/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