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

[Hindenburgo Pires]

Dear Mueller

Your comment would need to be answered in a more comprehensive way,
although I don't have to defend the use of multilateral expression or of
multilateralism because the Itamaraty (The Foreign Ministry) has already
done since the Second World War.

In international diplomacy the term multilateral means much more than "one
country one vote", the term multilateral means “several or many sides
involved”.

Multilateral is not the same as undemocratic, undemocratic is the
UNILATERALISM and the loss of diplomacy as a primacy of policy.

The ideology of the unilateralism has worked against the multilateralism,
as condition of legitimate social representation, and has destroyed the
diplomatic representation of the nation-states.

Although I do not have the desire to make any clarification or etymological
essentialist about the origin of the terms stakeholder (see the stakeholder
theory in Edward Freeman) and multi-stakeholder, these terms do not mean a
representation of plural civil society and more votes, but a representation
of interested parties (corporations, businesses, military sectors).

Therefore, from a methodological point of view and operational
multistakeholdism is not diversity representative, it is the field of
inertia representative of hegemonic unilateralism, articulated with the
private sectors and military that perpetuate the status quo.
Multistakeholdism is a disguised form of corporate unilateralism, the
primacy of the discourse of a single State (or an empire) on the other
nation-states.

For understanding of these strategies, we must also know how and when the
plural "stakeholders" is no longer used and had been replaced by neologism
multi-stakeholder to transform into a new mimesis of unilateralism in the
new field ideological and “diplomatic”. (See: Pires, 2014 -
http://www.ub.edu/geocrit//sn/sn-493/493-53.pdf )

The organizers of the event NetMundial translated erroneously the word of
English "multi-stakeholder" as multisectoral. Perhaps by an ideological and
non-linguistic issue because the translation of the word for the Portuguese
language should be "multiple Interested parties", that does not imply
sectors of society, but only corporate interests.

Here in Brazil, the word "multisectoral" was originally introduced in the
early 1990s, and means plurality of sectors engaged in defending the cause
environmentalist and was also used in reference to the different currents
of environmentalism at the conference Eco-92. Therefore, this concept does
not apply to this new context in which there are no sectors dialoguing and
deciding on proposals.

In NetMundial, representatives of countries, such as Cuba and Russia, who
managed to submit their proposals, were only ears, since there was no vote
in the plenary session and the final document, according to allegations,
was already prepared before the meeting here in Brazil, sponsored by ICANN.
But, with respect to these countries, Brazilian diplomacy is against the
economic embargo of Cuba and Russia.

Your assertion that I "join Russia and Cuba in dissent against the
Netmundial meeting” is not true because I even conversed informally with
the representatives of these countries and also, as the other participants,
I could not vote in favor of or against their proposals. Perhaps there was
a flaw in the surveillance of participants with respect to their dialogs
with other participants.

In NetMundial, in the Space of Dialog, sponsored by São Paulo Municipality,
on the day of the debate on “Sovereignty and digital surveillance in the
internet age", which was attended by: the journalist Natalia Viana, Neville
Roy Singham, Jacob Appelbaum and Julian Assange (online Chat), I was there,
as an observer, representing the International Network of GeoCrítica, at
this single event that dealt with this topic (mass surveillance). However,
the discussions of the forums of this area was not included on the official
document.

The questions that we should ask are:

When "networks" supersede the nation-states, in a Post-Westphalian
neo-liberal conception?

When the warfare state will no longer recognize the cyberspace as the fifth
area of control and power?

The mass surveillance and the installation of state of exception are
ideological strategics to the permanence of current unilateralism.

If we look at how this ideology is forming his followers in all countries,
offering top-down, courses, scholarships and funding for people who
advocate this ideas, it is clear that are not sectors of civil society who
are advocates the “multistakeholdism”.

2014-11-24 2:37 GMT-02:00 Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu>:

>  This is the kind of drivel that is more likely to make people support
> NMI than oppose it.
>
> Another clarification with regard to Internet governance is needed for the
> period in which Lula presided Brazil, there was a Brazilian multilateral
> diplomatic position, which did not accept the Icann *multistakeholdism*.
>
> MM: Yes, they were locked in the mentality of the past. They did not
> understand the Internet and the more distributed governance models emerging
> globally.
>
> It must be said that President Dilma Rousseffi, the opening of the 68th
> General Assembly of the United Nations on 24 September 2013, held in the
> Brazilian diplomatic tradition one multilateralist discourse, which
> advocated a democratic governance, multilateral and open. What
>
> MM: “multilateral” meaning, “one country one vote,” which is of course
> extremely undemocratic. Because it means not only that all the diversity
> within each nation-state is unrepresented, but also that undemocratic
> states have as much voting power as democratic ones. No thank you!
>
> happened was a maneuver performed by the CGI-Br members to break the
> diplomatic tradition of Brazil and make a meeting coordinated by ICANN and
> I * that began to adopt *multistakeholdist* ideology in the Sao Paulo
> meeting, the NetMundial.
>
> MM: Yes, Brazil’s government seemed to (wisely) move toward acceptance of
> a multi-stakeholder approach. To dismiss this as a “maneuver” by CGI.br (I
> guess they are not true Brazilians) seems to be a denial of reality. Or are
> you asserting that President Rousseff walked into the meeting completely
> ignorant of what was going on? But OK, duly noted: Mr. Pires joins Russia
> and Cuba in dissent against the Netmundial meeting.
>
> The meeting failed when not discussed the policies to fight the mass
> surveillance carried out by the US, when not produced a single line on the
> asymmetric model for the roots server system, when not opted to set a clear
> policy favorable to net neutrality.
>
> MM: I was there, and recall many discussions of mass surveillance. And the
> attacks on the unilateral approach to the DNS were mooted by the NTIA
> announcement that they would end it. There were no discussions of how to
> end it, but if you were paying attention there were many discussions of
> what should replace it.
>
> To overcome the *multistakeholdist* ideology of NetMundial Iniciative,
> civil society organizations (as JNC), social movements in networks and
> public and private actors need to engage in fights and discussions to build
> a new model of IG, which guarantee: a) a worldwide organization for
> Internet, that really represents the interests of all nation states
>
> MM: Wonderful. So it is not the people we want to represent, or even
> Internet users and suppliers, but “nation-states?”
>
> and to ensure net neutrality and respect the Internet as a common good; b)
> a worldwide Internet statement that has as principle the protection of
> privacy, freedom of expression and to promote free and universal access to
> the Internet and free software; c) a court with international
>
> MM: …because, as we know, nation-states are so devoted to freedom of
> expression, privacy and free software!
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Hindenburgo Francisco Pires

Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro
Departamento de Geografia Humana
*Sítio-web: http://www.cibergeo.org <http://www.cibergeo.org>*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20141126/353c2c53/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