[discuss] [governance] Re: Comcast undertakes 9 year IETF cosponsorship!?
parminder at itforchange.net
Mon Mar 24 03:39:39 UTC 2014
On Sunday 23 March 2014 07:58 PM, McTim wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 5:26 AM, parminder <parminder at itforchange.net> wrote:
>> It is difficult for me to discuss this issue with you when you so seamlessly
>> conflate 'public' with undemocratic governments.
> I do not see that pointing out that many gov's may not be entirely
> "democratic" is conflation as you suggest.
My email talked 'only' about public funding of governance functions...
Alejandro's response to that email, while beginning with a sense of
amazement, speaks 'only' of undemocratic nature of governments and civil
society's problems with them in this regard... For convenience I cut
paste below my original email in entirely, and relevant parts of
Alejandro's response. To me, it is clear that 'public' of public funding
has simply been conflated with supposed undemocratic-ness of
It is important to recognise that research is not a monopoly function,
but governance definitionally is. So, if commercial funding can distort
Internet research, it is but obviously that it has to be an absolute no
no for governance functions (standards making for something as socially
important today as the Internet, in absence of any further neutral
public oversight constitutes a governance function). (parminder)
Yet the position you present reverts power to governments only - e.g.
through the demand of public funding and the exclusion of private
funding; the same governments most civil society is at odds with
(admittedly in very different ways and levels.)
I continue to find it incredibly paradoxal to have civil society leading
the effort to braid the rope with which governments would gladly hang us.
Another perplexing element of this discourse is calling the effective,
open, evolvable, broadly participatory and open multistakeholder
processes undemocratic and the multilateral and governmental
"democratic", when maybe two thirds of the world population do not
consider their condition democratic. (Alejandro)
> This to me betrays a
>> complete lack of belief in politics and democracy - for anything that
>> governs will be governments, and they are bad as per you.
> He didn't say all are "bad", but today's news about the Turks blocking
> Twitter is just one more piece of evidence in a long chain of events
> that show that governments may not be the best vehicle for policy
> making in the IG space.
> The only
>> alternative being that market logic governs all aspects of social
> Really? the ONLY alternative?
> Nothing in your post addressed Alx's spot on commentary that MSism
> empowers CS. Is this not what we want?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the discuss