AW: [governance] RE: Blogpost: The-information-society-is-in-crisis-and-what-to-do-about-it

[parminder]

On Friday 18 July 2014 03:54 PM, "Kleinwächter, Wolfgang" wrote:
> Hi Michael,
>
> how a global compact (see below from your IAMCR speech) could look like? Who would be the signatories and how it would differ from the WSIS (2005) intergovernmental Tunis Agenda and the NetMundial (2014) multistakeholder Principles and Roadmap?

First of all perhaps we could just ensure that the big corporations do 
not write a good part of the text (see in this regard my previous 
email)... You say below that the term global compact emerged from the 
environment movement. Think of the horror with which that movement will 
react to the spectacle of a Shell or BP writing global normative texts 
on environment protection.
>
> Such a "global compact" was proposed again and again since the first WSIS PrepCom in 2002. The language "global compact" emerged from the environment movement in the 1990s (remember Franz-Josef Rademacher und Fridjof Finkebeiner in the Geneva WSIS Phase). Would it look like the CS Declaration from 2003? A Global Compact for the Internet was proposed four years ago by (now outgoing) EU Commissioner Nelly Kroes. But nothing happend. Do you have any outline/structure/language for such a compact and who should negotiate such a text and where the Project should be negotiated?

Pl see above. As long as dominant commercial interests can be kept away 
from negotiating the text, all possibilities of how do we configure 
global public interests are fine, and one is ready to explore them.... 
BTW, what do you think where and how should it be negotiated?
>
> Did you see what the governments on the BRICS countries had to say to the Internet and the global Internet Governance discussion (para. 48 - 50 of the Fortelezza Declaration)last week? They more or less totally ignored the letter from the five civil society organisations and even the words "freedom of Expression" or "civil society" do not appear in the text.

You are doing a very selective picking here. For instance, the BRICS 
statement out-rightly condemns mass surveillance. You'd perhaps remember 
that efforts to put such condemnation of mass surveillance into the Net 
Mundial outcome document (your darling document :) ) was not allowed by 
some distinctly non BRICS countries. Then the BRICS text seeks 
de-weaponinsing cyberspace and using the Internet only for  peaceful 
purposes, and US and its allies do not allow this kind of stuff to get 
into any international agreed text.

BTW the BRICS text does mention civil society.

parminder




>
> Wolfgang
>
>
> Form Michael´s text in Hyderabad:
> "What is needed is a global agreement, a global compact which sets out the broad framework for an Internet in the public interest, an Internet evolving and operating in support of the public good understood in the broadest possible way. One which doesn’t restrict but rather enables the many but not allowing the continued dominance of the few; one which is based on true Internet Freedom that is the Freedom from Internet surveillance, from the domination of a single language or a single culture, Freedom for a balanced and widely distributed set of benefits from the outputs of the Information Society.
>
> Such a global compact can in fact be a true democratically anchored multi-stakeholder initiative where national governments recognizing their needs for sovereignty and support of national interests, corporations looking for global level playing fields and stable environments for trade and markets and civil society concerned with human rights and economic and social justice can find common cause in building a new and global Information Society for the common good.
>
> Of course, such a development is completely idealistic and yet the Internet is so important to all of us, to nation states, to the private sector in all of its various components and of course to civil society–and even to those who currently might resist such a development as undermining their current benefits and advantages–for surveillance, for control, for “excessive” profits.  If the alternative is a fragmented Internet, one which has no basis of trust, where this fundamental infrastructure develops with huge gaps and significantly weakened connections then, even they might recognize that an Internet that functions is better than one that doesn’t and if the price of doing so is to have some taming of the wild west of digital space then better a solution of compromise and finding mutual interest and benefit rather than one of winner takes all.
>
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: governance-request at lists.igcaucus.org im Auftrag von michael gurstein
> Gesendet: Fr 18.07.2014 05:17
> An: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> Betreff: [governance] RE: Blogpost: The-information-society-is-in-crisis-and-what-to-do-about-it
>   
> I was told that putting arrowheads at both ends would keep the URL from
> breaking... but no such luck... anyway for anyone who was interested and had
> problems with the link here is the TinyURL
>
> http://tinyurl.com/oehhx8q
>
> M
> -----Original Message-----
> From: michael gurstein [mailto:gurstein at gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, July 18, 2014 7:16 AM
> To: governance at lists.igcaucus.org
> Subject: FW: Blogpost:
> The-information-society-is-in-crisis-and-what-to-do-about-it
>
> <http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2014/07/17/the-information-society-is-in-cris
> is-and-what-to-do-about-it/>
>
>
>
>
>


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