[discuss] cgi.br release regarding Brazil Global MSM on Internet Governance

Mon Jan 13 15:22:08 UTC 2014

now I am confused... at Mueller willing to bet on 1Net?

I am so used to being on the other side of his views :-) I have been idling in the background, sitting on the fence and  watching...and now am still seated on the fence, watching but in addition confused :-).

walu.
--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 1/13/14, Milton L Mueller <mueller at syr.edu> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [discuss] cgi.br release regarding Brazil Global MSM on Internet Governance
 To: "'Louis Pouzin (well)'" <pouzin at well.com>, "discuss at 1net.org" <discuss at 1net.org>
 Date: Monday, January 13, 2014, 6:04 PM

 >Even though Parminder
 won't have the resources to block the US bully,

 >I support his
 obstination to reveal the cunning ICANN strategy, or

 >opportunism, for
 grabbing control of the São Paulo show 

 Then we really need
 to part ways here, Louis.

 Your analysis of the
 political situation is just wrong. The appeal to habituated
 “US bully” emotions is intellectually lazy, and
 using that to create a stampede
  of sectarian stragglers is an act of self-righteous
 defeatism. 

 We have here an
 unprecedented reform opportunity. While not perfect, it is
 as good as we are likely to get in the next, oh, decade or
 two. The standard forms
  of US pre-eminence are on the defensive, but people are
 also questionining state-centric solutions. People from a
 variety of sectors are seriously thinking about global
 nstitutional frameworks. The technical community, which as
 you have seen on this list is
  often utterly clueless about global governance and what it
 means, seems sincerely willing to cooperate with other
 forces for a change. 1net has kept its promises about
 letting sectors pick their own reps. Blaming the disunity of
 CS (and business!) on a cunning
  ICANN strategy seems ridiculous to me.  

 I am not naïve
 about this: yes, ICANN as an institutional player can and
 will look out for its own organizational interests. So will
 the RIRs, ccTLDs, etc.
  I know this better than you, actually, because I engage
 with the institutional IG environment not just with email
 lists. Yes, the USA,  - and Brazil , and all other
 nation-states – will look out for their own parochial
 interests. Still, the current environment,
  in which states and ICANN balance each other somewhat and
 both sides have incentives to achieve legitimacy by being
 inclusive, has some potential. I think you insult our
 Brazilian colleagues when you talk about ICANN grabbing
 control of their meeting.

 I defy you to come
 up with a feasible scenario for reform and legitimation that
 is better than the current one. A feasible option does
 _not_ in my opinion
  mean having “our own meeting.” Such a meeting,
 held in isolation from the ICANN regime and from Brazil and
 the governmental entities it can bring to the table, would
 be pointless.

 -----Inline Attachment Follows-----

 _______________________________________________
 discuss mailing list
 discuss at 1net.org
 http://1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss