[governance] Text of Parminder's input

[parminder]

On Tuesday 22 December 2015 04:29 PM, Mawaki Chango wrote:
>
> So is this debate in fact about the following (IOW are we being asked
> to choose between two sides in the following antagonisms, sometimes
> meaning to choose the least among two evils)?
>
> The Powerful (private business) vs Government (presumably democratic),
> or verbatim: "the powerful" vs "democratic mechanism's representatives"?
> Or even more abstractly:
> Power vs Democracy, irrespective of whether that power is wielded by
> private entities or governments, democracy being the side wherr the
> people finds itself?
>

Yes, exactly Mawaki - 'democracy is the side where people are'... It is
that which promises and ensures (as closely as possible) that every
person has same and equal political rights as any other. And any
political system can be tested against this clear principle - especially
whether if it is headed in a more democratic direction or less. I dont
see too much confusion here - people seem to be too easily confused
about 'democracy' now a days. (Yes, there is a strong global movement
today against dominant political cultures in different places, but that
is against the respect political cultures and not against democracy,
although this discontent is sought to be used by those who want to
preserve their illegitimate political and economic power, which
democracy challenges, by turning it into being against democracy.)

Of course no political system is even close to being perfectly
democratic (we are dealing with social phenomenon here not with calculus
or geometry). But then what is more or less democratic can 'relatively'
be easily judged by whether it increases people's power, and equability
of their power, or decreases it. That is a simple test of democracy,
that we must apply.

For instance, I have not heard anyone try to describe how giving more
political power to corporates, through including them in
multistakeholder decision making increases people power (adn equality of
power among them?  But if one has such arguments please share them.

( I am reminded that one speaker on a panel on MSism and democracy at
the IGF said that corporates 'included' - i think this was the word used
- both the employees and consumers of a business and therefore they have
a political role - of course paraphrasing and can be corrected.... And I
immediately protested...  I said that, in fact, it is from 'their'
business owners that employees and consumers often needs public policy
assistance/ protection the most. The fact that employees and consumers
would likely be harmed if a business somehow disappears can no way be
turned around to mean that in political terms the business somehow, to
whatever extent, 'includes' the interests of the respective employees
and consumers.)

I used the above as at least an attempt to use a democratic test on a
multistakeholderist political thinking, however ill-founded in my
consideration.

Putting a democracy test should not at all be that difficult - as long
as we compare two political systems with sufficient degree of clarity of
their configurations (which MSists never let on), or two stages of
evolution of a political system. And not use the democracy test
summarily, with a pre-conceived bias and objective -- Like saying, see,
obviously this so called democratic thing is not too good, and
'therefore' lets adopt another system - to which we are ready to apply
no test of democracy, ie show how the alternative is more democratic
than the rejected one. In sum: in absolute terms 'democracy' may be
unclear and confusing, but it so much less so in relative terms. And for
practical actors, it is the relative that matters.


Mawaki, basically, I am disagreeing with both the (related)  propositions

1. That there is a huge amount of confusion around 'democratic'

2. There are any dangers or risks of democracy (as you mention below)

parminder

> Unfairness (to the economically least powerful) vs Centralization? Or
> Unfairness vs Capture enabled by centralization through government?
>
> Democracy vs Distributed system (governance)?
> Democratic governance vs Self-governance, "self" mostly referring to
> those with material stake or the resources to participate?
>
> This seems a bit confusion (despite all the rationality) but one thing
> becomes increasingly clear. The reluctance from some to apply the
> category of democracy to Internet governance stems from the
> limitations (and risks? dangers?) of democracy in their eyes. Is there
> a thoughtful - and as comprehensive as possible - articulation of
> those limitations, risks and/or dangers to be found somewhere? Do we
> think the two sets of concerns are irreconcilable?
>
> Mawaki
>
> On Dec 18, 2015 4:50 PM, "Garth Graham" <garth.graham at telus.net
> <mailto:garth.graham at telus.net>> wrote:
>
>
>     > On Dec 17, 2015, at 8:14 AM, anita <anita at itforchange.net
>     <mailto: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.
>
>     GG
>
>
>
>
>     ____________________________________________________________
>     You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>          governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>     <mailto: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:
>      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/20151222/99a7b626/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