[governance] URGENT: Last call for feedback on CS participation in NETmundial Initiative

Wed Nov 19 04:35:34 EST 2014

Even within civil society, include only those sections of civil society 
that still use jargon like neoliberal

I suppose it is a mercy that 'evil capitalist running dogs' is out of 
fashion these days.

On November 19, 2014 2:52:03 PM Sivasubramanian M <isolatedn at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Guru,
>
> (You (Guru) said:  
> > WEF is a primarily group of big businesses. We have seen the increasing
> > danger to the ideals of the WSIS Declaration of Principles from the
> > activities of transnational corporations. Apart from using/monetising our
> > data for their commercial gains in 
> authorised/unauthorised/illegitimate/illegal
> > ways, their unregulated work also is structuring our participation in the
> > information society in many unhealthy ways. Through Snowden we also
> > understand how many of them are in cahoots with the 5 eyes (USG+) on
> > extraordinary programme of global surveillance
>
>
> If such as strong generalization of big business is to be accepted as fair
> and valid, then all those who subscribe to such a generalization may have
> to go back to the WSIS declarations and summarily exclude Business as a
> Stakeholder group, and then declare that Internet Governance ought to be a
> process with two stakeholder groups - Government + Civil Society.  No, no,
> on second thoughts I see your reference to Snowden and USG+, so the Civil
> Society could exclude Government from Internet Governance, and declare that
> Internet Governance must be reinvented as a single stakeholder group
> process, with Civil Society as the only stakeholder group.
>
> Seriously, i
> f WSIS had committed to build a "
> people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society
> ", what happens to inclusiveness and development with such a position on
> Big Business? 
>
>
> And, why this hatred for big business? Most progress in this world has
> happened because of enterprise, much more because of business than because
> of Government.  Granted, some of the information technology big businesses
> have worked with Governments on surveillance designs, and even there, we do
> not know how of much of such cooperation came out of a desire for profit
> and how much of it was forced by arm-twisting or by milder pressures in so
> many subtle and imaginative ways.
>
> Irrespective of how WEF's role has been articulated at the moment, it is a
> very positive development to bring in the WEF
> .
> 
> WEF participation suddenly expands business participation to a world of
> business outside the IT sector, so WEF's attention to IG issues might by
> itself act as a balancing influence within the corporate world, because
> many of these Big Businesses are Internet "users" themselves.
> Some of these Big Businesses are possibly charitable in unknown ways. What
> is needed here is strong support at the moment, and w
> e could
> eventually 
> work towards a greater balance across stakeholder groups.
> 
>
> Sivasubramanian M <https://www.facebook.com/sivasubramanian.muthusamy>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 12:52 PM, Guru <Guru at itforchange.net> wrote:
>
> >  Dear Mawaki
> >
> > I would like to cite from two sources:
> >
> > A. WSIS Declaration of Principles -
> > http://www.itu.int/wsis/docs/geneva/official/dop.html  (the very first
> > two clauses)
> >
> > 1. We, the representatives of the peoples of the world*, *assembled in
> > Geneva from 10-12 December 2003 for the first phase of the World Summit on
> > the Information Society,* declare our common desire and commitment to build
> > a people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society,
> > where everyone can create, access, utilize and share information and
> > knowledge, enabling individuals, communities and peoples to achieve their
> > full potential in promoting their sustainable development and improving
> > their quality of life, premised on the purposes and principles of the
> > Charter of the United Nations and respecting fully and upholding the
> > Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
> > 2. Our challenge* is to harness the potential of information and
> > communication technology to promote the development goals of the Millennium
> > Declaration, namely the eradication of extreme poverty and hunger;
> > achievement of universal primary education; promotion of gender equality
> > and empowerment of women; reduction of child mortality; improvement of
> > maternal health; to combat HIV/AIDS, malaria and other diseases; ensuring
> > environmental sustainability; and development of global partnerships for
> > development for the attainment of a more peaceful, just and prosperous
> > world. We also reiterate our commitment to the achievement of sustainable
> > development and agreed development goals, as contained in the Johannesburg
> > Declaration and Plan of Implementation and the Monterrey Consensus, and
> > other outcomes of relevant United Nations Summits.
> >
> > I now will cite  from the WEF site - http://www.weforum.org/our-members
> >
> > Begin
> > Our Members
> > The World Economic Forum is a membership organization. Our Members
> > comprise 1,000 of the world’s top corporations, global enterprises usually
> > with more than US$ 5 billion in turnover.  These enterprises rank among the
> > top companies within their industry and play a leading role in shaping the
> > future of their industry and region. Some of our Member companies join the
> > Forum’s Strategic and Industry Partnership communities, which are designed
> > to deepen their engagement with the Forum’s events, project and
> > initiatives.  The Forum’s Members are at the heart of all our activities.
> > End
> >
> > It is clear that WEF is a primarily group of big businesses. We have seen
> > the increasing danger to the ideals of the WSIS Declaration of Principles
> > from the activities of transnational corporations. Apart from
> > using/monetising our data for their commercial gains in
> > authorised/unauthorised/illegitimate/illegal ways, their unregulated work
> > also is structuring our participation in the information society in many
> > unhealthy ways. Through Snowden we also understand how many of them are in
> > cahoots with the 5 eyes (USG+) on extraordinary programme of global
> > surveillance, which helps them in their goals of political-economic
> > domination / colonisation
> >
> > Participating in forums anchored in such a space will only legitimise
> > their power.  I am clear that IGC should not participate in the NMI.
> >
> > thanks and regards
> > Guru
> >
> > Gurumurthy Kasinathan
> > Director, IT for Change
> > In Special Consultative Status with the United Nations ECOSOC
> > www.ITforChange.Net| Cell:91 9845437730 | Tel:91 80 26654134, 26536890
> > http://karnatakaeducation.org.in/KOER/en/index.php/Subject_Teacher_Forum
> >
> >
> > On Tuesday 18 November 2014 05:02 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote:
> > > Dear All,
> > >
> > > You must have heard a good deal about this by now, so I won't repeat
> > > the background details. In the middle of the night last night, before
> > > hitting the bed after a long and drawn out day playing catch-up with
> > > deadlines, I saw that Ian (chair of CSCG) forwarded the NMI
> > > Transitional Committee's reply the CSCG enquiry. Basically, they are
> > > willing to let the CSCG vet CS candidates to be part of the NMI
> > > Coordination Council.
> > >
> > > Now the question before us is to get a feel of the membership of CSCG
> > > member entities as to whether to get involved in the NMI process or
> > > not. I believe this is the last step in the consultations we've been
> > > having (with NMI initiators, among ourselves at the CSCG and with the
> > > membership of our respective organizations.) After this we should be
> > > able to give a definite answer, formulate a definite position about
> > > our participation in the NMI process.
> > >
> > > So what do you think? Please get right to the point and be brief.
> > > State your preference for IGC Involvement or No involvement and, if
> > > you care to provide us with such, I would be grateful to you if you
> > > could keep your supporting argument in one short paragraph (as we
> > > just want to take the "temperature of the room" if you see what I
> > > mean.)
> > >
> > > Thank you for your understanding. Best regards.
> > >
> > > Mawaki
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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/20141119/bf79b91e/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