On talking about hypocrisy (was Re: [governance] CSTD WG on Enhanced Cooperation)

Tue May 7 07:05:00 EDT 2013

Diaz

Why this mumbo-jumbo of "third world provincialism"

I ask that because I hail from the provocative "third world" where
people from the "first world" come to assassinate, maim and pilfer
resources while enthrenching malfeasance to please their whims and
calprices.

I have finally descovered that this forum has become an arena where
people lash out phrases at reckless abandon.

Too bad

Aaron

On 5/7/13, Adam Peake <ajp at glocom.ac.jp> wrote:
> Thanks. Kind of helpful. One thing:
>
> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 4:15 PM, Riaz K Tayob <riaz.tayob at gmail.com> wrote:
>> There are many ways to answer this question. And is in a range. With lots
>> of
>> fudging...
>>
>> There is a the generous view McTim espoused recently. Then the apposite
>> RPerry 'absurd and self-evident'.
>>
>> Then there is the experience of Auerbach, MM Ruling the Root, and of
>> course
>> 'if it aint broke don't fix it' to the 'you are crazy' - in historical
>> time
>> of this list.
>
> The list position, best I recall, has never been 'if it aint broke
> don't fix it'.  Quite the opposite.
>
> Adam
>
>
>
>> This of course is not technical, but about how tendencies in
>> 'groups' are projected/interpreted in the POLITICAL realm. Technically we
>> know there was monovalent position on CIR when as RP puts it was
>> bivalent.
>> We know the score :)
>>
>> For technical definitions I think KR and DR and perhaps Auerbach may be
>> more
>> up your alley, as I am not inclined to anachronistic views, and
>> revisionism.
>> Auerbach's Cave Bear may still be one of the best resources, if you are
>> interested in a critical perspective. And as Norbert changed the tenor
>> here,
>> so will just let sleeping dogs lie regarding my personal experiences.
>>
>> But by the 1rooter debate precedent was set by this in the IGC and it is
>> a
>> flexibility I interpret to afford 'us' equal space to make claims in
>> which
>> we are able to define 'the terms of the terms' of engagement. A rather
>> difficult and tedious process - intellectual diversity is certainly not
>> the
>> IGC's forte.
>>
>> There is very little in common, despite what McTim suggests, in some of
>> the
>> positions too - although with a legitimate structure a single root would
>> be
>> less offensive (for instance MMs and McT's internationalisation are
>> definitely not how I see it - to bring issues up to date the 'evolved 1
>> rooters' (and then some) and my kinda ilk).
>>
>> Political lines are drawn rather clearly. I can't make you feel good
>> about
>> your positions, nor can you about mine. That is just politics.
>>
>> Riaz
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 2013/05/07 09:17 AM, Adam Peake wrote:
>>
>> What is a "single-rooter"?
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>

-- 
Aaron Agien Nyangkwe
Journalist-OutCome Mapper
P.O.Box 5213
Douala-Cameroon
Telephone +237 73 42 71 27

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