[governance] In Multistakeholderism, those who would be Lobbyists become Legislators, & nobody else has a vote

[Paul Lehto]

On Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 11:13 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net>wrote:

> [snip]
> On the other hand, if I begin to consider government, say my government,
> as one stakeholder, whereby I as a part of some other group would be
> another stakeholder, I am on a very problematic ground. I have admitted
> that 'my government' (defined as the government of the political entity
> which I can be considered to primarily belong) is, even normatively,
> expected to have 'its own' interests, other that of its constituents like
> me. And that having such 'own interests', whatever it means, is in quite
> fine, theoretically. To that extent I have regressed on, or in fact lost,
> the 'representativity' problematisation stated above.
>

All of what you say here is true: finding a democratically elected
government that must - to be legitimate - represent ALL of its people to be
but ONE "stakeholder" is deeply problematic for the way it downgrades the
actual and potential power of democracy so that it is less powerful than
business interests alone, much less business interests plus some individual
civil society groups should they happen to band together on one issue or
another.

Even more stunning is Milton Mueller's comment that business support ALONE
(or business with civil society) would constitute "popular support" for a
given proposal.

Milton's absolutely stunning admission, in the context of multi-stakeholder
governance systems, means that democratically elected governmental
officials do NOT represent anything in particular, and that business
support alone is proof of popular support (and thus presumably obtains the
mantle of democracy via this popular appeal and support).  Under Milton's
test, business support alone would not only trump we the people, it would
constitute the proof that popular support in fact rested with the business'
proposal, regardless of what democratically-inclined actors might say.

And indeed, regardless of the specific facts here, consistent with this
approach Parminder has taken a democratically-inclined approach in general
contrast to a business-style approach, and Milton has specifically found
Parminder's support to be essentially non-existent even though surely it is
not, and further stated that there is "no popular support" whatsoever for
UN involvement with internet governance even though that is likely true
only of business actors who fear regulation and not of people generally
(even if the numbers be small, they would not constitute zero or "no
popular support.")

Just as MS governance does, Milton discounts democratic support heavily
(such as by characterizing Parminder), inflates the importance of business
support (it alone would constitute "popular support), and also discounts
civil society support, because only "*BUSINESS AND* civil society" support
would constitute "popular support" in Milton Mueller's assessment.  So, if
business doesn't support it, it basically doesn't exist as "popular
support" and thus would have to be disregarded every time popular support
is required for governance.  Consequently, within a MS framework and
apparently even without a MS framework,* for Milton Mueller the only
opinions that matter are those of business, *because without business
support, civil society support alone simply can not constitute "popular
support".  Thus, whether civil society or legitimately elected democratic
representatives, anyone honestly attempting to represent popular support or
public opinion does not matter unless they can obtain business support for
their positions.

Talk about turning democracy and popular support upside down and on its
head.

Paul Lehto, J.D.
-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4965 (cell)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20121027/c2064b42/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