[governance] Fwd: [At-Large] The Internet as we know it is dead

[Ian Peter]

Hi Norbert,

the reason I originally got involved with this internet governance stuff was 
that nationalisation = balkanisation in the Internet sphere.

International agreements would overcome this and lead to more sensible 
stable addressing of critical issues. We are not going to get nations out of 
the picture but we may be able to get them to act collaboratively and set 
principles and protocols for addressing internet issues.

That would not be full on "multistakeholder" governance, but it would be a 
significant advance on the current unilateral action status quo.

It's probably more feasible than what most people imaging multistakeholder 
to be. We should be encouraging governments to act collaboratively with each 
other, as well as with other stakeholders.

Ian Peter

-----Original Message----- 
From: Norbert Bollow
Sent: Friday, August 30, 2013 7:57 AM
To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
Subject: Re: [governance] Fwd: [At-Large] The Internet as we know it is dead

I read Diego's posting not as expressing that presumption, but as
questioning the feasibility of “denationalization of Internet
governance”.

Are there reasons to believe that this “denationalization” is feasible?

Greetings,
Norbert



Am Thu, 29 Aug 2013 21:46:32 +0000
schrieb Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>:

> I would have to reject the way you presume that the society = the
> state. That is the whole point of my argument - they are not the
> same, _especially_ in cyberspace. I also would have to question your
> assumption that "asymmetries" (not entirely clear what you mean by
> this, but I assume you mean inequalities) are overcome or mitigated
> via the existence of states.  Wow, what an assumption. So in the
> world of states, there is no asymmetry between USA and Uruguay, or
> between China and Laos. Hmmmm.
>
> But of course, such problems are not easy to overcome. No one said
> they were.
>
>
> From: Diego Rafael Canabarro [mailto:diegocanabarro at gmail.com]
> Sent: Thursday, August 29, 2013 4:56 PM
> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org; Ian Peter
> Cc: Milton L Mueller; Adam Peake
> Subject: Re: [governance] Fwd: [At-Large] The Internet as we know it
> is dead
>
> The "denationalized model" proposed in Networks and States
> intentionally puts asymmetries aside. And for the larger part of
> those 190 or so states (and their societies), asymmetries (especially
> socioeconomic ones) are high priority in their international affairs.
> It doesn't seem to be something easy to overcome, does it?
>
> Regards
> Diego
>
> On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 5:33 PM, Ian Peter
> <ian.peter at ianpeter.com<mailto:ian.peter at ianpeter.com>> wrote: Well
> stated Milton!
>
> "The choice is not "the multistakeholder model" vs. the ITU. It is
> the denationalization of Internet governance vs. the international
> anarchy of governance by 190 nation-states."







____________________________________________________________
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 


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