<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On Sunday 23 March 2014 07:58 PM, McTim
<pre wrap="">On Sun, Mar 23, 2014 at 5:26 AM, parminder <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org"><email@example.com></a> 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.</pre>
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 governments. parminder <br>
<font face="Verdana">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)<br>
</font>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.)
<div>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.</div>
<div>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)<br>
This to me betrays a
<pre wrap="">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.
<pre wrap="">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?