[governance] For a change an oped in the Hindu that advocates multistakeholderism rather than support for the CIRP

[Suresh Ramasubramanian]

Chetan Khanna [18/02/14 16:56 +0530]:
>Its indeed interesting that there is a constant criticism on the advocacy
>for anti-multistakeholdherhism in India. But please do let me know whom are
>we protecting? Big MNC's.Question arises how many jobs do they create and
>how many job loss do they lead to?

Umm. Google / Microsoft / other MNCs collectively employ several lakh
people. What job loss is led to - a hypothetical one which would be, if
they didn't join those, didn't join their indian counterparts like TCS and
Infosys, and actually set up startups and hired people.  Having actually
had to try hiring people for a startup, and then have the kid's parents
tell him "no, I never heard of this company, join tcs where you have an
offer" .. 

>Youth in policymaking? Am a youth myself but do know for a fact that we are
>not capable to make policies regarding peer to peer, free software or for
>that matter copyright. i can learn but policy making is definitely not our
>cup of tea.

Are you so sure? You hang around the right places, listening to the right
people, till at a certain stage you get an opinion that you are not afraid
to voice.  In a policy development process the knowledge required is a bit
more complex and so you tend to be no longer described as "a youth" by the
time you feel able to contribute. But well, I am 37. And there are people
in their 60s here. And M.Pouzin is already 82.

>And to even think of advocating a free and transparent-ism in a society
>which has not known individualism in its 2000 year history is almost like
>opening a can of worms.

Sometimes cans of worms just do need to be opened. How else are you going
to catch any fish at all?

>Interestingly, to even think that India is a service industry which is
>dominated by IT. The claims of a multistakeholderism in India should be
>looked as completely shallow within the country.

Are you so sure?  If you get to be in the industry and know other players
there, you might both agree - and disagree - with your statement.

>Yes, multi-lateralism is bad but we cannot just impose a completely new
>culture in our society. We did try it once when we became independent. The
>result , we became a noisy democracy! So by backing multi-stakeholdherhism
>where are we heading?

Sure. Maybe russia should have remained under the tsars, and the americans
under the british crown.

>Having going through the arguments of civil society for the past 6 months
>am only surprised that "status" matters and not ideas!

You are seeing the uglier side of civil society where - like anywhere else
- there are a few people for whom status matters. Those are not
stakeholders, they are steakholders. But don't confuse that minority with
all of civil society unless you want to include yourself, for example, in
it.  Find other people you can agree with, join them formally or
informally.

	srs

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