AW: [governance] Re: [bestbits] Surveillance paragraph of netmundial document

Thu Apr 17 07:04:07 EDT 2014

Wolfgang,

SNIP
>  The Multistakeholder Model does not exclude intergovernmental treaties. The problem today is that those (old and new) intergovernmental treaties are embedded into this new multistakeholder environment and governments have to take more into account than their own interests if they agree on legally binding mutual rights and duties. 

This is an incredible statement!

In my view, you are the one totally confusing things and losing sight of what are societies all about, in particular Democracies that tend to recognize the ideas of global commons and public interest: corporations interests- the largest part represented in your MS model-  are not superior to public policy efforts. The equal footing design and fluffy concept is an attempt to deprive us all from our singular rights to participate in the world we want, and the web we want. Public policy, governmental and intergovernmental work, treaties are elaborated to rebalance what the markets, free-wheeling, illegitimate entities tend to enforce over individual freedom and citizen rights. According to your statement, we citizens, and our governments have to be embedded in a MSistic world. MS priesthood should not take its desire for a reality. MS does not exist as a model of governance, barely as model for dialoguing - even that seems not to be true. The democratic world will not obey or be subjected to MSism.

"Almost everyone agrees in the abstract that justice, understood in the social manner, requires what Rawls describes as " a proper balance between competing claims." But who are the claimants to justice? What is the agency that is to balance their rival claims? And what are the claims that need to be balanced?" Philip Pettit, in Just Freedom: a moral compass for a complex world,  Norton, 2014

Well, I do not feel comfortable, as a Democrat concerned with social justice and fair global development, that we should hand over to any MS priesthood of illegitimate bodies the role to answer these questions asked by Pettit. I would feel a free man* if the Internet governance would be put under the wise oversight of citizens, their representatives whether elected or the diverse civil society movement that flourish to defend local and global communities on this planet. This is why I suggested in my submission (#187)** to transform the IGF into a WIF (World Internet Forum) able to challenge, check and balanced the governmental powers assembled in a WIO. Only to the condition of a separation of roles, do we, as in any democratic system will be able to preserve an open and interoperable Equinet, made of not one, but several root zones.

* Freedom requires the absence not just of interference, but of the subjection to another that was known at the time of Roman republic as dominatio. The ideal freedom was thought as non domination. A challenging idea. I do not equate freedom of citizens, and freedom of corporations. MSism is misleading us in a flat world, where citizens, governments and corporations would be of "equal footing". This is pure non sense, IMHO.

** The Next Best Stage for the future of Internet Governance is Democracy

Principles live throughout times. This is why Democracy is so critical when it comes to look at Internet governance, a fantastic, new refreshing major global commons. It will not thrive any longer if it does not embed itself in a democratic perspective. Not the other way round. Democracy embedded in MSism? Big joke? No big danger! Fascism was primarily a promise of a better democracy, more efficient, more distributive, more decentralized. We know where it led the people. The concierges were kings of Italy and would denounce in every building (geolocalisation) the ones that would not fit in the new enhanced democracy proposed by FSism.

Dialogue is always welcome. Democracy is more than needed when one thinks of governance, including Internet governance.

JC

Le 17 avr. 2014 à 12:03, Kleinwächter, Wolfgang a écrit :

> Parminder: 
> The EU Working party seeks: " An international agreement providing adequate protection against indiscriminate surveillance" and "development of a global instrument providing for enforceable, high level privacy and data protection principles as agreed upon by the International Conference of Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners in their Madrid Declaration"That is what we should be talking about, not the vacuous statements of the public NetMundial outcome draft, which in fact are not innocent because they seek a multistakeholder public policy decision making model which will simply make such kinds of agreements impossible...
> 
> Wolfgang:
> You are confusing things. The Multistakeholder Model does not exclude intergovernmental treaties. The problem today is that those (old and new) intergovernmental treaties are embedded into this new multistakeholder environment and governments have to take more into account than their own interests if they agree on legally binding mutual rights and duties. The world today is bigger and much more differentiated than "black vs. white". Simplification is very often misleading and triggers conflicts instead  enhanced commmunication, coordination and collaboration.  
> 
> 
> 
> 	 
> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20140417/2a0a52f3/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