[governance] tyranny of majority (was Re: Debunking eight myths about multi-stakeholderism)

Jefsey jefsey at jefsey.com
Fri May 1 15:45:53 EDT 2015 

At 20:51 29/04/2015, Jean-Christophe NOTHIAS I The Global Journal wrote:
>Whatever you do with your computer, you are still part a world that 
>is trying to avoid wars by peaceful means (national laws, 
>international laws and treaties). Nuclear weapons might be part of 
>that peace process but I leave this to the specialists.

Dear JC,

this is totally orthogonal to the issue. The world digital ecosystem 
has a constitution. That constitution is its source code (Lessig). 
Whatever you can discuss about the impact of the political, legal, 
sentimental, economic, intellectual, national, etc. ecosystems, you 
will not change that: my machine only obey its source code.

>More to my first point: your assumption is "...as long as my machine 
>can use the catenet the way I wish". Well this is something that 
>quite does not the fit the ordinary citizen.

Yes, it does. My machine uses the catenet the way both are designed. 
However, external political, legal, sentimental, economic, 
intellectual, national, etc. factors including cops, lack of money to 
subscribe, cyberterorists, power outage, etc. may impeach my machine 
to connect the catenet.

>Moreover it suggests a world of individualities that could one way 
>or another live by themselves, as far they do not interact with 
>others. OK I do play around a bit, but still your starting line 
>seems a bit individualistic when thinking of collective and public 
>interest. And therefore the reasoning might fall short of the real 
>issue which is not only about one accessing and using the catenet as 
>he wishes. The challenges we face go beyond that point.

No. You are outdated. The Information Society is deemed to be people 
centered. i.e. with billions of individual centers, what fits the 
cosmological model of Einstein. The ICANNET BUG (Being Unilaterally 
Global) is just a bug. That it pleases some is a consequence of the 
"don't call it a bug, call it a feature" syndrom. But at the end of 
the day multiple versions of the "MYCANN plug-in" will fix that. 
Creating another mess calling for an anti-multipluging fix.

>If the compass is "freedom to connect to the catenet", then maybe it 
>is better to be a pro US as they do love to give us Freedom here, 
>Freedom there. They love it so much because it resonates with 
>Free-market, with as very limited regulation (competition, 
>distortion, abuse...) So if this is all about freedom, and if we do 
>not find any reason to care about others, then we do not need any 
>such e-listing.

Hmmm ! ever heard of NSA? Patriot Act. Master/slave relation - or 
sometimes a consumer/server model?

I Heard about NSA-compatibility in 1985. Closed my shop. 
Economics/technology are now in favor of Relationnels Libres freeing 
themselves from the miltaro-industrial band. Let see what RFC 6852 
permissionless innovation principles lead to. Let set-up as 
post-google civil society Mitre project.

>Second point: what Barry says makes a lot of sense when coming to 
>legitimacy, or enfranchised stake-holders. This sense of chaos among 
>the "stake-holders", these who-ever that Jankélévitch would make fun 
>of, is a way to negate the collective burden. It flattens everything 
>and everyone in its due rights. Take the MS definition as per Larry 
>Strickling (thanks to Carolina for fowarding this to the list). It 
>might not endanger you wether you play in the system, or outside the 
>system. But it might be an issue for many others without all of your abilities.
>
>Strickling: "What do we mean by the multistakeholder model?  One 
>expert defines the multistakeholder model as different interest 
>groups coming together on an equal footing to "identify problems, 
>define solutions, and agree on roles and responsibilities for policy 
>development, implementation, monitoring and evaluation."

I am not interested in wasting much more time in money selected 
expert meetings. I prefer running code and living mode. My role and 
responsibility in all this was and still is to make it work. They 
blocked me as non-NSA-compatible 30 years ago. Time has technically 
come for us to enjoy resuming the frozen innovation.

>Whatever RFC we talk about, we have an issue here.

Please explain. Most of architectural RFCs are good enough if they 
are respected.

>Where I tend to follow you is about the fact that the solution will 
>ultimately come from techies, to bypass all this domination, when 
>the degree of dominance will be recognized as a toxic wonder killing 
>societal fabric, democratic debate, encouraging all abuses... Open 
>roots and other ideas are interesting and challenging to the current 
>tech-order. Das Order! On that I believe your first option is the 
>right one, the second one being just a big pantomine.

It is no more a pantomine than Saddam's mass destruction weapons.
This is the way the US tried to lead the world in order to lead 
political consumers to sign TIPP, ACTA, etc.

>I still believe that politics (and our old fashion democratic 
>principles) need to fully step in this MS mess.

Democracy is out of scope. Democracy is for citizens, belonging to a 
city, located on a territory. It calls for a bouleuterion, archons and cops.

The digital ecosystem is the people's agora. We are in an agoric 
concept (i.e. polylectic logic). The US are in a an enthymeme vision 
(monolectic logic) : "We are the US, hence we rule the world". Things 
are slightly more complex. At least democracy is dialectic.

>It might sounds like two principles or concept opposing each other, 
>when they are not. Think of integration and decentralization. They 
>can accommodate and uphold each other. Surely we will go through 
>more blahblah.- before anything can happen, or before a group large 
>enough will become the obvious alternative to this stupidity.
>Debating is part of any democratic process.
>
>Trying to build on what you, Barry and others are saying.

The network is holocratic. We are a multitude of fringe to fringe VGN 
(virtual glocal networks) Masters, sharing ***our*** local digital 
and financial resources to build the global catenet we need. Can you 
explain me what ICANN brings to us, if they are not the cheapest, 
leanest, most efficient common secretariat to our common needs - i.e. 
mutual address plans, namespaces billions of roots, multitechnology 
parameter excel table keeper and interfunctional meeting report writer ?

Best
jfc



>Le 29 avr. 2015 à 15:05, Jefsey a écrit :
>
>>Gentlemen,
>>
>>it seems that all this are dreams in the air.
>>xxxxcracies are about government of several people. Here we 
>>consider the mutual governance of machines. I personnally do not 
>>give a damn about what you may think, vote, decide, etc. as long as 
>>my machine can use the catenet (i.e. the shared digital local 
>>resources that make the global network) the way I wish.
>>
>>The only thing that can happen to me is that you gather together in 
>>a "global community" (cf. RFC 6852) making your machines not to 
>>respect the RFCs and trying bloking mine. OK. That is your problem 
>>if I technically circumvent you - soemthing I and you have no doubt 
>>the Libre community can easily do.
>>
>>Next, you can decide to lobby the lawmaking process and send me 
>>cops to prevent me from using my machine along the RFCs. This is 
>>exactly what some of you are doing, who bet that the best cops for 
>>the job are the american ones.
>>
>>Here the response is (for those who care about the US weapons of 
>>mass destruction) :
>>- either to technically outsmart the american lawmakers (again as 
>>per RFC 6852, through non RFC standardization people will use) and 
>>disregard its cops, TPP, TAFTA, etc.
>>- or to make the odds so uncertain for the US that the US executive 
>>branch delays its transition to ICANN/DAVOS.
>>
>>I am afraid everything else is either international blahblahblah or 
>>local US election preparation.
>>Thank you to tell me where I am wrong ?
>>
>>jfc
>>
>>At 11:36 29/04/2015, Norbert Bollow wrote:
>>>On Wed, 29 Apr 2015 11:15:35 +0200
>>>Jean-Christophe Nothias 
>>><<mailto:jeanchristophe.nothias at gmail.com>jeanchristophe.nothias at gmail.com> 
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>> > This tyranny of majority is an intriguing item.
>>>
>>>In governance systems which have majority voting but not the other
>>>essential elements of the modern understanding of democracy, it will
>>>sometimes happen that tyrannical, i.e. human rights violating, decision
>>>proposals are supported by a majority of votes, and therefore
>>>considered adopted. A famous example was the state-sanctioned murder of
>>>Socrates in ancient Athens.
>>>
>>>In democratic governance systems of course in such a situation there is
>>>the possibility to get the outcome of the vote overturned by a court
>>>decision on the basis that it is a human rights violation.
>>>
>>>In democratic governance systems therefore tyranny of majority does not
>>>occur.
>>>
>>>Greetings,
>>>Norbert
>>>
>>>
>>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>>>Content-Disposition: inline
>>>
>>>____________________________________________________________
>>>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>>     <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>>To be removed from the list, visit:
>>> 
>>><http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>>
>>>For all other list information and functions, see:
>>> 
>>><http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance>http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>>>To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>>     <http://www.igcaucus.org/>http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>>
>>>Translate this email: 
>>><http://translate.google.com/translate_t>http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>>
>>
>>____________________________________________________________
>>You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>>     <mailto:governance at lists.igcaucus.org>governance at lists.igcaucus.org
>>To be removed from the list, visit:
>> 
>><http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing>http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing
>>
>>For all other list information and functions, see:
>> 
>><http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance>http://lists.igcaucus.org/info/governance
>>To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
>>     <http://www.igcaucus.org/>http://www.igcaucus.org/
>>
>>Translate this email: 
>><http://translate.google.com/translate_t>http://translate.google.com/translate_t
>
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
>Content-Disposition: inline
>
>____________________________________________________________
>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/20150501/057f1e87/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

More information about the Governance mailing list