[bestbits] [governance] Re: NMI and the Brazilian CGI.br
Joao Carlos Caribe
caribe at entropia.blog.br
Sun Nov 23 11:52:15 EST 2014
Dears let me bring my $0.02...
I understand the Parminder's ponderations about the fact that Brazilian CGI.Br could be spending political capital. Also the Wolfgang's valuable placements about the concerns overshadowed by the NMI thread must not be forgotten.
Also going back to the past we must remember that NetMundial meeting was purposed by Fadi to our president Dilma after her valuable speech at UN based on the CGI.Br principles. One of the first step of the Brazilian government after this meeting was seeking for the CGI.Br advice. Following this I think we must remember the Bali meeting with Bests Bits and the Brazilian government that shaped the way NM meeting would be. Also remember our shared concerns about this meetings, included the fact if they would or not be necessary.
Also we are facing the same dilemma, concerns, and obviously evaluating the political wealth of our positioning. Also my point of view remains the same, NMI will move forward with or without us, and I continue imagining despite the NMI was connected to WEF, our progressive participation on the board in a maximum number of chairs allow us to strength our force against the any WEF position. Also resulting the growth or shrinkage potential of NMI.
Hugs
_
João Carlos Caribé
(21) 8761 1967
Enviado via iPad
> Em 23/11/2014, às 08:51, Carlos Afonso <ca at cafonso.ca> escreveu:
>
> BTW, I recall your article in that US-based blog, Huffington Post, denouncing NETmundial (not the initiative, but the meeting), just before the start of the event, as a complot by USA and the corporate folks to complete their "domination over the Internet":
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeanchristophe-nothias/for-more-internet-and-mor_b_5175698.html
>
> I quote: "Still the Netmundial true co-organizers, ICANN and CGI.br still have had to make choices, even though the cost for traveling to Brazil already provided a natural selection in terms of attendance. To date, corporate delegates are to occupy more than 40 percent of the room. So here we are, after six months of intense behind-closed-doors preparation, ready to attend Netmundial, a conference that claims to be "multistakeholder," but which is really about launching the next stage of US global multistakeholder domination over the Internet, thanks to an ICANN++."
>
> Do you still think this is a true rendering of the NETmundia event?
>
> frt rgds
>
> --c.a.
>
>> On 11/23/14 07:17, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal wrote:
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>> bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
>> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>> http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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 --------------
____________________________________________________________
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