[discuss] My current understanding of scope and why
jmamodio at gmail.com
Wed Jan 8 11:58:42 UTC 2014
> OK, well I understand your position, which seems to me to come from a very
> strict and cynical sort of realism (see
> whereas I am more of a liberal institutionalist who holds that there are
> forces that can drive states to cooperate with each other, and with other
> international actors, through new multi-stakeholder governance networks,
> and that in the long term these can influence policy change both within and
> outside of domestic legal processes. So that's where our approach to the
> Brazil meeting and Internet governance reform differs. But whose approach
> is "nonsense" is in the eye of the beholder.
In that sense then lets say that I'm a liberal machiavellic realist with a
strong pragmatic view of trying to accomplish what is possible without
wasting time and resources on endless discussions that will get nothing
done in the short term.
I recognize that multi-stakeholder organizations can influence the decision
process in some matters but as ICANN demonstrates being 15 years old and
still not mature and being the long term too long for these type of
processes as IGF demonstrates, we need a more effective approach to get
tangible results in the near term. Is 1net the conduit to make that
happen?, I don't know yet.
We all want world peace, but as laudable that thought is we know is not
achievable with the current state of affairs.
I don't think that anarchic chaos is the solution but you can be as
liberal as you want but we live in a real world, and until somebody hits
the nail with the hammer the portrait will keep falling.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the discuss