[governance] Re: NMI and the Brazilian CGI.br

Sun Nov 23 04:17:56 EST 2014

Carlos,

Following what Parminder and Louis wrote, and I am in full agreement with both, but I think every one here makes a difference between Lula accepting very rightfully to come to express his views at Davos, and Lula joining an initiative by a Californian non profit making profit and a Swiss non profit making even more profit. Therefore, I would bet that everyone makes a clear difference between partying with an unclear setting by WEF/ICANN , and its Brazilian companion of misfortune, and an invitation to talk to the global leaders, thanks to a nice room service in Davos. 

That being said, I thank Wolfgang for reminding us that NMI is taking our eyes away from more serious concerns -  an evidence that this initiative might be a great deal of waste for civil society asking itself questions (not about the contents) but about the seats.

JC

Le 23 nov. 2014 à 00:46, Carlos Afonso a écrit :

> Dear people,
> 
> In January 2003, Lula was just starting his first term as president. As usual he went to the World Social Forum where he was met with massive acclamation. I remember crying like a child to experience in loco the thousands of people cheering Lula.
> 
> From Porto Alegre he went to Davos.(*) Yes, that daunting lair of corporate devils! A group of militants, NGOs and social movements of course criticized Lula, along the same lines JNC does today as a sort of scion of its view of political correctness. But other militants, NGOs and social movements supported Lula's visit to WEF (I was among them) -- our president had to establish dialogue with all sectors, and there is no one who could say WEF indoctrinated Lula, or that WEF took the reigns of the government of Brazil. If anything happened, it would be the other way around.
> 
> I like to recall this story because it reminds me of the fury of arguments at the time -- just like we see today the different (adversarial?) camps of civil society nailing each other.
> 
> fraternal regards
> 
> --c.a.
> 
> (*) See, for example, this report:
> http://www.ictsd.org/bridges-news/biores/news/two-world-forums-debate-globalisation
> 
> On 11/22/14 21:30, Suresh Ramasubramanian wrote:
>>> 
>>> I am greatly disappointed that so many friends in the CGI.Br has now come
>>> out to vouchsafe or front for what is basically a WEF and ICANN (basically
>>> doing US's bidding) game.
>> 
>> Disappointed?  My heart bleeds for you, to be sure.
>> 
>> 
>>> everyone knows WEF to be. Do the Brazilians, who kind of gave the world
>>> the World Social Forum, really need to be reminded of the basic lessons
>>> with regard to the designs of global domination by a certain economic and
>>> political elite, and their impatience with democracy, especially at the
>>> global level!
>>> 
>> 
>> Now you call them naïve.   How incredibly patronizing.
>> 
>> Any so called "democracy" of the sort you seem to want, that excludes stakeholders based on any nationality and/or economic backgrounds that you dislike, is emphatically not a democracy, but merely pure demagoguery.  Makes me glad that you continue to remain far, far away from the civil society mainstream thinking on this subject.
>> 
>>> Again, you are fast expending the political capital that the Brazilian
>>> government and CGI.Br has,  something that I find to be such a great loss,
>>> and very much hope were not the case. *The global progressive community
>>> has consistently  supported you, but this support cannot be taken for
>> 
>> I admire how you keep attempting to speak for the global progressive community, in pushing the regressive agenda that you continue to push, and that the majority of the community apparently doesn't share.
>> 
>>> granted, which is my unfortunate duty to tell you, as you come out
>>> publicly to seek global support for a WEF centred global governance
>>> initiative.*
>>> 
>> 
>> Your support, and those of the small splinter group of extremists that caucus with you? Well, may the good Lord preserve us all from such support.
>> 
>>> Your statement says that you are willing to dialogue and work together
>>> with everyone. Some of us from global progressive civil society offer
>>> ourselves for such a dialogue. We have in our hands today the interests
>>> and fate of the people of the world,  and of the future generations. Let
>> 
>> That sounds more like a royal "We" than any sort of inclusiveness.  Do stop trying to speak for civil society at large.  You don't and have never represented it all.
>> 
>> --srs
>> 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20141123/3daaf363/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