[bestbits] Re: [governance] IGC press release in response to the NTIA announcement of March 14

Mawaki Chango kichango at gmail.com
Sun Mar 16 15:26:17 EDT 2014


 Hello,


On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 5:37 PM, Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hello
>
> IGC supports the multistakeholder policymaking model to the extent that it
>> does not contradict the ideals of democracy, including due consideration to
>> the rights of minorities (in the context of Internet policy)
>
>
> "to the extent that Mutli-stakeholder model contradict the ideals of
> democracy"?  Multi-stakeholder model is expanded democracy, the next step
> in the further evolution of democracy. Is there room for this model to
> contradict the ideals of democracy???
>

Sorry, you completely misread this... Or you are objecting to yourself
since you're the one who took the 'NOT' out of that sentence by re-typing
it instead of just reading the original one correctly. It reads: "does NOT
contradict..."


>
> "consideration of rights of minorities" - If this is a Global process,
> open for participation from all stake-holders, from every nation, the
> policies that would emerge out of the process is bound to be balanced. The
> intention behind this thought about the "rights" of minorities might be
> noble, but as unintended consequences, this idea of special attention could
> lead to politicization of the process.
>

This has nothing to do with 'special attention' or with special interests
or with ethnic or cultural minorities (I put the following in parentheses
in front of the word 'minorities': 'in the context of Internet policy'
precisely to signal that this is not about cultural or ethnic
minorities.) Suresh's reading is right; it is about inclusiveness and
consensus building. I was trying to avoid limiting the reference to
democracy to its most common instances or simplistic understanding whereby
the winner (majority) takes all, in favor of the ideals of democracy
whereby the majority still has to take the views or interests of the
minority into consideration while governing (think of Egypt and the
democratically elected President Morsi.) More precisely (and completely
unrelated to Egypt in my mind), I borrow the notion of "rights of
minorities" from Hannah Arendt in her analysis of totalitarianism. But I
hear you and will try to reconsider the wording.

Thanks,
Mawaki



> In India the intention to protect minority interests began with policies
> of special attention, special laws and reservation of seats for minorities
> in education, work and politics and this move to ensure social justice has
> also caused some imbalance in a certain way; In the US, the Government's
> openness to representation by Special Interest and Lobby groups, at least
> occasionally, results in a situation where the amplified voice of the lobby
> group wins over the muted voice or silence of others. Certainly a global
> process can not create a situation where minorities would be neglected, but
> this needs to be achieved in a manner that does not complicate the goodness
> of the process. Instead of mentioning "minorities" we could say "all"
>
> Sivasubramanian M
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20140316/c2477402/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


More information about the Governance mailing list