[governance] Text of Parminder's input

[parminder]

On Friday 18 December 2015 10:19 PM, Garth Graham wrote:
>> On Dec 17, 2015, at 8:14 AM, anita <anita at itforchange.net> wrote:
>> Pl find the link to a video clip and the corresponding transcript here: http://www.itforchange.net/UNGA_WSIS10 
> Parminder concludes:
>> …. left to itself the digital-network phenomenon will certainly be appropriated by the powerful and will result in an even more unequal and unfair world…
> Whereas I would conclude: Left to a "democratic mechanism for global governance of the Internet” the digital-network phenomenon will certainly be appropriated by the democratic mechanism’s representatives Centralizing the governance of a distributed system makes it far more subject to capture than by any other method.

Garth, thanks for your engagement. Let me raise some questions about
what to me seems to be somewhat convenient assumptions that we employ -
and are employed above - in dismissing the case of democratic governance
of the Internet, and its associated phenomenon. Due to paucity of time,
my statement at the UN General Assembly
<http://www.itforchange.net/sites/default/files/UN%20General%20Assembly%20WSIS+10%20Meet%20-%20Transcript.pdf>
was able to address only 3 of these unsubstantiated assumptions, and
that too admittedly in a very summary manner.

As I asked in the statement, how is trade less decentralised than
Internet, or education, health or livelihood practices (say,
agriculture)... All these have global governance bodies that have /not/
in the act somehow tied their decentralised nature into some singular
global homogeneity - which would be no less problematic in these cases
than it would be for the Internet.  At the same time the UNESCOs, WHOs
and FAOs of the world have done great great service to these respective
sectors, through research work, capacity building, standards
development, as well as through soft and hard law.

I think the same would be true for the the impact of the Internet (and
its associated digital phenomenon) on our social structures, which is
rather deep and wide.

One main problematic assumption of course is that governance of the
Internet is often taken just in the sense of its technical governance -
of protocols, names/ numbers, and such, while much bigger and much more
important issues lie beyond, in social, economic, political and cultural
realms. Because of this 'problematic assumption' people are often
talking past one another.

BTW, if you are such a fan of Internet's distributed nature, why then
have a globally integrated and centrally (technically) managed Internet.
Why not have a really federated Internet where different communities
have their own Internet which they manage as they wish, and about which
they negotiate inter-operability protocols with neighbours and others as
they wish. (Why then is this term 'balkanisation of the Internet' is
about the worst possible in the same discourse. It to be sounds like
distributed, polycentric, amorphous, and so on..) Just taking your
'distributed Internet' thinking to its real and logical conclusions.  I
mean, just with the US gov and big business calling the shots with
regard to the global Internet and in this process taking the cover of
'distributed governance' is not a sham I would like to allow the
powerful to get away with. (Who decided that a generic name like .Book
could be privatised? The world's distributed public!? or the US's big
business and the reigning US political ideology and establishment.)

 Did you for instance notice that email service  today is much more
centralised - more and more around gmail - than it was 10 years ago, and
have you thought of what is causing this, if not governance failures . I
am happy to hear your explanation in this regard. In general, if you
have clear and plausible suggestions about how the current moves towards
greater and greater centralisation of the Internet can be reversed I am
happy to hear them, and work with you on them.

I think that a good part of this is because the powerful have been able
to control the discursive spaces (including technical and large parts of
civil society) in this area, and check the emergence of strong political
forces that can seek people's sovereignty over the Internet (and its
associated digital phenomenon) .... Unfortunately, they have done this
in the name of terms like distributed governance (that suddenly became
very current about 2 years back) or polycentric governance (Fadi's
current favourite). If you really what the know what is distributed,
bottom-up and so on, go to the people's movements in different areas,
and forms like people's assemblies and the World Social Forum, and ask
them if they agree with the globalisation's language of distributed,
polycentric etc when it is used to destroy legitimate policy spaces! I
am doing nothing other than extend that some logic to the IG space,
where this problem has taken an even more vicious form.

It is in the name of 'distributed' that the WEF inspired Net Mundial
Initiative was set up, and now a Wuzhen Initiative is being spoke of.
Both global digital superpowers, the US and China, want their own show
in this space, which is understandable from their perspective. But why
should people really concerned with global public interest and the
interest of marginalised people buy into their vocabulary is what I find
surprising, and which I wanted to put my finger on during the UN GA speech.

parminder

 


>
> GG
>
>
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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/20151222/f2c70aa2/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