[governance] Have there been any statements re: PRISM from the "technical community"

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

Riaz, at least McTim knows and says that his government free governance is utopian. And he doesn't tilt at that one single windmill ad nauseam, or even more than occasionally, for which I thank god.  

His contributions to the list range rather farther afield, rather than restricting himself to turgid prose on much the same topic that doesn't appear to have any kind of consensus that I have seen.

--srs (iPad)

On 11-Jun-2013, at 3:08, Riaz K Tayob <riaz.tayob at gmail.com> wrote:

> McTim et al
> 
> On Kafka we can always agree :) 
> 
> But we differ on first principles. As stated in the thread on internationalisation (of yours and Milton's), we disagree at the level of first principles. The freedom/liberty/voluntrism implicit in those articulations is one I characterised of a particular kind, as Fischer I think wrote - free to choose; which I did not share. The repost at that time from more heterodox views appended, free to loose. It is a particular type of voluntrism - where everyone is free to sleep under bridges, rich or poor. Kinda like Marie Antoinette who allegedly said, why don't they eat cake. I doubt she     said it because of her type of upbringing as later historians argue as she was brought up with strict noblesse oblige and was active in caring for the destitute despite her privileges.
> 
> For purposes of taking matters forward, if constructive action/s are possible in this vein, perhaps you could clarify your views on internationalisation, multistakeholderism (equity in representation of estates, public interest, commercial sector, revolving door appointed 'regulators'), legitimacy of governance of CIR including ICANN. You have been vocal on this so perhaps you do not want to go through these, but I do think it may dispel any misapprehensions of others on your views some critiques/dialogues of ours may have caused.
> 
> Then there is the procedural aspects of political practice (not right or wrong, just about processes; kinda yes/no) regarding the relevance of IGC list discussion on - whether there is a common set of issues between the technical and regulatory/public interest; - the US ecosystem of laws and institutions as a subject of debate for the Global Internet; - the role and practice of corporations in internet governance; procedures for selection of and composition of technical team members; - whether it is a valid democratic option to opt not to deal with ICANN and related institutions to object to their illegitimacy, whether (legitimate) vested interests have the same standing as public interests,  and if the same standards of universal human rights and democratic norms should apply to all countries. 
> 
> Since you feel pilloried, and I have my notes, this may clarify it for others - far be it for me to characterise your views at this point. As you know, chopping the head off of the many hydra that is Internet Governance and replacing it with a legitimate one while retaining all other arrangements (for incremental change) is valid for discussion as is the Parminder/ IT4Change proposals (not speaking for them, just a reference). This is no less idealistic than your utopian/conception of government 'free' internet governance (italics because the state is still called upon to regulate and enforce property rights - the a priori contradiction at the heart of many libertarian views, just fyi :). 
> 
> Riaz
> 
> On 2013/06/10 11:39 PM, McTim wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> On Mon, Jun 10, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Suresh Ramasubramanian <suresh at hserus.net> wrote:
>>> More worryingly, I have found neimoller's great words often sadly cheapened by dragging them into any debate at all about a government's actions.  Possibly in effect comparing said government to the evil regime that targeted him and everybody else in his poem?
>> 
>> 
>> What I find worrying is that those of us who have always been concerned about giving gov'ts too much power in IG arenas are now pilloried for blocking attempts at giving gov't too much power when it is in fact a gov't that is responsible for this fiasco  (not the T&A folks, nor biz folks who are also pilloried).
>> 
>> Kafkaesque!!
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Cheers,
>> 
>> McTim
>> "A name indicates what we seek. An address indicates where it is. A route indicates how we get there."  Jon Postel
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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 --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20130611/151dd522/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