[governance] Bloomberg - The Overzealous Prosecution of Aaron Swartz

[parminder]

McTim

Actually I should thank you for your email. I find it to perfectly 
expound  what I call US Exceptionalism in the context of global IG.

You say that the US /'continues'/ to have a legitimate 'historic role' 
in the global governance of the Internet, which I understand to 
certainly mean as special and being different and higher than of any 
other country/ government.

However, in the next sentence you suggest that since it is difficult to 
change the status quo, it is low priority for you and many others..... 
Here you still do not explicitly say that you think it is wrong that US 
should have a higher role than other governments. You simply casually 
say, it is difficult to change things and so.... Do you think it is 
easier to change China's authoritarian policies vis a vis the Internet, 
which consideration never seems to come in our way of criticising them 
and seeking change.... Why then this special favour to the US, is the 
question.

(you also say that there is no alternative but to let the global 
Internet corporations be subject basically to the US jurisdiction, 
because in your view any multi-lateral alternative is worse .)

In the next para however you are rather blunt. You say that " What is 
wrong and unacceptable is the labeling of recognition of a pretty fixed 
reality as "wrong and unacceptable"! "

I havent heard a clearer status quoist statement. You are telling us 
that 'a pretty fixed reality' is best to recognised as such, whereby it 
is useless to protest and seek change. (People can actually say such 
things on CS lists which are supposed to do advocacy for political change!!)

McTim, you have rather clearly described the politics of US 
exceptionalism and status quo-ism which is indirectly practised by many 
on this list .

As to your comment

" What is also wrong and unacceptable is the notion that those of us who 
advocate for a single unified Internet are somehow suspect. " (McTim)

This is a complete red herring. I have no doubt that I am as much a 
supporter for a single unified Internet as you may be.

parminder

On Sunday 20 January 2013 08:20 PM, McTim wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 5:08 AM, parminder<parminder at itforchange.net>  wrote:
>> On Sunday 20 January 2013 03:00 PM, Adam Peake wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> I don't recall support the notion of US Exceptionalism from anyone on this
>> list.
>>
>>
>> No one will profess that term for oneself. However, clearly it is US
>> Exceptionalism being practised when:
> No one on the list you mean?
>
>
>> 1. anyone agrees or shows strong sympathy with the view that US has (not
>> just 'had') a 'historic role' in the evolution of the Internet
> this is factual, I would expect people to have strong sympathy towards it.
>
>
>   (and perhaps
>> in protection of its 'basic principles', whatever it may mean) and therefore
>> some degree of continued pre-eminence of the US government in some key IG
>> arrangements, including of the CIRs, is fine/ acceptable...
> Well it is what we have and there are significant barriers to overcome
> to eliminate this (US Congress for one) that makes working on this
> issue very low down on the priority list for many of us.
>
>
>> 2. anyone is fine with US laws/ courts/ executive/ statutory authorities
>> (FCC, FTC etc) determine much of how the Internet's architecture develops,
>> whether through US law/ jurisdiction’s application on the ICANN, or on most
>> of the monopoly global Internet mega-corporates....
> Again there is no feasible alternative (except my bitBoat or
> Internetistan idea maybe).  Would you like FB, Google, Yahoo!, all the
> tier 1's etc, etc to be regulated by a UN CIRP?  There is no way you
> will get any significant number of nations to give up sovereignty in
> this way.
>
>
>> In fact, if the IGC can agree that such US exceptionalism is wrong and
>> unacceptable
> What is wrong and unacceptable is the labeling of recognition of a
> pretty fixed reality as "wrong and unacceptable"!
>
> What is also wrong and unacceptable is the notion that those of us who
> advocate for a single unified Internet  are somehow suspect.
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130121/47b05ba9/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