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

[Baudouin Schombe]

Hello

Thank you for the damage that such an approach presents. Milton arguments held
in the socio-political reality in industrialized countries or economically
very comptétitif globally.
But this arguement problem in developing countries where there is not yet an
effective framework for collaboration between public sector actors, the
private sector, civil society ...
This approach must relativize and contextualize it in the appropriate
geographical area.

*Baudouin*

2012/10/27 Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com>

>
>
> 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)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
SCHOMBE BAUDOUIN
CENTRE AFRICAIN D'ECHANGE CULTUREL/
ACADEMIE DES TIC
FACILITATEUR GAID/AFRIQUE Membre
At-Large Member
NCSG Member

email:baudouin.schombe at gmail.com
         baudouin.schombe at ticafrica.net
tél:+243998983491
skype:b.schombe
wite web:http://webmail.ticafrica.net
blog:http://akimambo.unblog.fr
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20121029/bb2e551d/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