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

[Milton L Mueller]

From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Paul Lehto

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.


Ø  I have no idea what you are talking about, and I frankly doubt anyone else does, either. Try providing an exact quote.

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,


Ø  You seem not to have noticed that none of the governmental officials involved in ICANN, GAC, etc are "democratically elected." They are at best political appointees (e.g., Strickling), and for the most part career bureaucrats (e.g., GAC reps). Parliamentarians are conspicuously absent. And of course once you include Parliamentarians or elected representatives it would also mean that the positions taken by governments would be as diverse and pluralistic as those of civil society. If governmental positions in international institutions did indeed reflect this pluralism and diversity my view of them would change. As long as you advocate the unitary state, I do insist that governments do not represent "democracy"

Ø  You also have lost sight of the fact that it is government officials who respond to (big) business lobbyists most strongly. This is evident to those of us who actually attend and participate in international institutions. You will find that out, if you ever get some real experience to go along with your prolix writing.

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


Ø  A complete fabrication. You are hallucinating. Yes, in assessing popular support business (which is _not_ a uniform, homogeneous group) counts, but no one has ever said that those opinions are the only ones that matter.

Ø  And yes, if you have a coalition of civil society and business against the state, then you are much more likely to succeed politically. That is just a fact, borne out empirically in cases ranging from SOPA/PIPA to net neutrality to the encryption battles of the early 1990s.

Ø  My point relative to Parminder was simply that there is preponderance of business OR civil society support for CIRP. Still haven't seen any evidence to the contrary.

civil society support alone simply can not constitute "popular support".


Ø  Hallucinating again.

Ø  Civil society and private business are not as dichotomous as you seem to  believe. But let's assume, for the sake of argument, that something was supported by 60-80% of individuals and civil society organizations and OPPOSED by most businesses. To me, this would indeed constitute evidence of popular support.

Ø  But to repeat, there is no evidence that CIRP has such support. And that is what we are discussing.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20121029/f94857ad/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