[governance] [bestbits] Remarks at UNESCO Closing Ceremony of "Connecting the Dots Conference"

David Cake dave at difference.com.au
Mon Mar 9 04:16:17 EDT 2015 

On 5 Mar 2015, at 5:21 pm, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:

> 
> 
> On Thursday 05 March 2015 02:05 PM, David Cake wrote:
>> 
>> On 5 Mar 2015, at 12:39 am, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>>> .The fact that some  'civil society' persons sided with US and its allies (who as the key power-holders in the global IG realm have their obvious reasons) to do so indeed makes it a sad day for public interest advocacy.... parminder
>> 
>>  I really find some civil society persons siding with Russia and the KSA on some issues to be a bigger long term concern for support of democracy within civil society, but perhaps that is just me.
> 
> David, I am more that ready for an honest debate, but here you are cutting some part of an email and making an unconnected case out of it. The main point in my email was not 'siding with US' but 'siding with US to resist inclusion of 'democracy' in the UNESCO document', which I indeed consider nothing less than scandalous . Now, on the 'democracy' part, if you have any views please share them, and if any questions, I am happy to answer.

	Sure.
	Leaving aside the symbolic value of democracy as a word, much of the debate here seems to be about the practical implications of including it as a descriptor of multi-stakeholder processes. What practical differences to the governance of Internet governance institutions, current or potential, do you believe would be made by the inclusion of the word democratic? I’d be interested to hear either positive (properties such institutions should have) or negative (properties they should not have).
	If this is merely a debate about the form of words, then I don’t think could be considered that scandalous. Jeremy claims that if the inclusion of the term in descriptions of mutti-stakeholder bodies means anything concrete, it means retaining a special role for government (in, presumably, all situations, not just those areas like law enforcement that governments have a special role intrinsically by law). JNC denies that interpretation - so please, what IS your interpretation of what the term democratic in the context you discuss would mean.


> I do not know what and whom you refer to in talking about siding with Russia (will you like to be explicit). Meanwhile, I will greatly protest anyone siding with Russia to condone, say violence against journalists, or arbitrarily shutting down websites - both of which happen a lot in Russia.

	Certainly. Russia is a terrible nation for free press, has used DDOS and other similar tactics for suppression of political speech in the past, and also practices shutdowns.
	It is also worth noting, given the apparent JNC drive for CS groups to disclose funding that in my cases it would cause significant problems for CS organisations operating in Russia, given that Russia has passed laws characterising CS organisations that receive foreign funding as ‘foreign agents' (though Russia is also increasingly a source of CS funding for causes like anti-abortion and anti-LGBT campaigns).

> However, Id be happy to side with Russia to resist US and its corporation's hegemony over the global Internet.

	In which way do you think that this would NOT increase the influence of relatively un-democratic nations such as Russia and China? In which way do you think reducing the influence of the US would not amount to less influence of a democratic power?
	FWIW, I’m all for decreasing the direct power of the US, and enthusiastically support the IANA transition and removing other ‘special roles’ of the US moving forward - but the JNC position seems to strongly advocate reduction of the soft power of the US and its allies as well, which in the current geopolitical climate inevitably means increasing the influence of authoritarian governments. I remain somewhat confused about the extreme JNC hostility to US soft power.

> Similarly, I'd very happily side with US on spreading globally its new found enthusiasm for net neutrality and community broadband as national level best practices.

	Indeed, we are in agreement there.

	David

> 
> parminder
>> 
>>  Regards
>> 
>>  David
>>>> 
>>>> M
>>>> 
>>>> From: bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net [mailto:bestbits-request at lists.bestbits.net] On Behalf Of Jeremy Malcolm
>>>> Sent: March 4, 2015 7:42 AM
>>>> To: Jeremy Malcolm
>>>> Cc: Civil Society Internet Governance Caucus - IGC; Nnenna Nwakanma;<bestbits at lists.bestbits.net>
>>>> Subject: Re: [bestbits] [governance] Remarks at UNESCO Closing Ceremony of "Connecting the Dots Conference"
>>>> 
>>>> On Mar 4, 2015, at 4:33 PM, Jeremy Malcolm <jmalcolm at eff.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> You’re right, but you can nevertheless thank UNESCO for the opportunity to participate on a multi-stakeholder basis and acknowledge that the outcome document is a lot richer than it would otherwise have been because of this.
>>>> 
>>>> Also, please clarify that the Just Net Coalition does NOT represent all of civil society.  This given that Richard Hill on behalf of the coalition has just disrupted the meeting with a formal objection to the document due to its omission to qualify references to multi-stakeholderism with “democratic” (which he incorrectly stated was not objected to during the last drafting session), and its omission to include a reference to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.  Other than his objection, the document was adopted by the meeting by consensus.
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Jeremy Malcolm
>>>> Senior Global Policy Analyst
>>>> Electronic Frontier Foundation
>>>> https://eff.org
>>>> jmalcolm at eff.org
>>>> 
>>>> Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161
>>>> 
>>>> :: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::
>>>> 
>>>> Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt
>>>> 
>>>> PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220
>>>> OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD
>>>> 
>>>> Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide:
>>>> https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ____________________________________________________________
>>>> 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
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ____________________________________________________________
>> 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:
>     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 --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 455 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20150309/7418a624/attachment.sig>
-------------- 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