[governance] Report on WCIT // Suggested Next Steps

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

Well yes, now that you mention it, I see it - and other adversarial debating tactics - being used all the time on this caucus.  More's the pity.

A happy medium between the extremes tends to be very useful in building bridges - except where there's a noticeable resistance to seeing such a bridge come into place, or maybe hack down any existing bridges (such as trying to crowd out and marginalize, or question the credentials of, the technical and academic community, in a recent incident).

Thank you so very much for raising this.

--srs (iPad)

On 02-Apr-2013, at 21:38, "michael gurstein" <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:

> Suresh,
> 
> This is a typical trick being used for example in the current attempts to
> discredit expert knowledge/research in the climate change discussions.
> Informed interventions are countered by ill-informed (often "greenwashed")
> assertions and the media for example, ill-advisedly looks for a happy medium
> "between the extremes".
> 
> M
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Suresh Ramasubramanian [mailto:suresh at hserus.net] 
> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 8:29 AM
> To: michael gurstein
> Cc: <governance at lists.igcaucus.org>
> Subject: Re: [governance] Report on WCIT // Suggested Next Steps
> 
> Ah - that is just meeting an extreme point with a counterpoint from the
> opposite extreme
> 
> The two of us (and possibly the more vocal advocates of 'the south' on this
> caucus) are probably entirely the wrong people to draft a neutral and
> unbiased position.
> 
> --srs (iPad)
> 
> On 02-Apr-2013, at 20:52, "michael gurstein" <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Again, these are potentially empirical questions cast within an 
>> ideological frame...
>> 
>> Well worth researching, but by parties rather more neutral than for 
>> example, the proponents/beneficiaries of the policy positions implied 
>> by your stream of argument).
>> 
>> FWIW I have had the opportunity to participate in some "expert" 
>> discussions on related matters within the OECD and I've discussed some 
>> of the limitations built into conventional approaches in much of the 
>> research being produced in this area...
>> http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2011/09/25/measuring-the-unmeasurable-in
>> ternet
>> -and-why-it-matters/
>> 
>> M
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org
>> [mailto:governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org] On Behalf Of Suresh 
>> Ramasubramanian
>> Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 7:17 AM
>> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Norbert Bollow
>> Cc: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>> Subject: Re: [governance] Report on WCIT // Suggested Next Steps
>> 
>> On 02-Apr-2013, at 18:57, Norbert Bollow <nb at bollow.ch> wrote:
>> 
>>> Which parts of these observed fears and concerns are real unsolved 
>>> problems, and which parts are just fruits of rhetorical 
>>> dramatizations and fears that would go away if the concerned people 
>>> would simply inform themselves reasonably well?
>> 
>> The additional questions are bound to be - which of these observed 
>> fears and concerns actually have other, entirely different, causes 
>> including but not limited to -
>> 
>> 1. A closed / government monopoly economy, including expensive and 
>> controlled internet and telecom access [the control might even exist 
>> for political or censorship reasons in a relatively more open economy]
>> 
>> 2. A flight of capital, in particular intellectual capital, to other 
>> countries, due to the lack of an enabling environment for business in 
>> the country itself [such as just how many Indians and Chinese work for 
>> Google and Facebook rather than setting up startups in India and 
>> China]
>> 
>> 3. Other localized micro / macro economic factors, as well as enabling 
>> factors including education, electricity, a stable and democratic 
>> government ..
>> 
>> 4. How much of this "belief" is caused and fuelled by the people 
>> believing this opposing "the north" and in particular the USA on 
>> ideological or political grounds, to the extent that any news at all 
>> in this area is interpreted with an ideological slant and selectively 
>> skewed to fit whichever ideology the individual concerned holds to, using
> the classic
>> tools that a propagandist has at his or her disposal?   
>> 
>> The perpetrators of this last are not by and large not likely to 
>> modify their behavior by "informing themselves well", though people 
>> who they may influence could certainly benefit from alternate sources 
>> of information and discourse.  I am aware that political and personal 
>> beliefs will definitely influence thoughts and behavior but this goes 
>> rather beyond that.  And an axiom of propaganda is that repeating 
>> something patently false often enough, and unopposed, tends to lend even a
> blatant canard a veneer of truth.
>> 
>> I welcome the thoughts of this caucus.
>> 
>> --srs
> 

-------------- 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