<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div>Dear Milton, Avri and all,<br><br></div>as you might guess, it would be inappropriate for me to react on this list to your comments on Vice-President Kroes' letter to the NETmundial High-Level Multi-stakeholder Committee - although I do find them quite interesting.<br>
<br></div>In any case, I do want to clarify that I am taking note of all such comments / reactions, whether shared on this mailing list or eslewhere, and I am making sure they are known to the Vice-President and the colleagues of the European Commission who will be accompanying her in Sao Paulo.<br>
<br></div>Best,<br><br>Andrea<br><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 7:04 PM, Avri Doria <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:avri@acm.org" target="_blank">avri@acm.org</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi,<br>
<div class=""><br>
On 12-Apr-14 12:52, Milton L Mueller wrote:<br>
> It’s great that Vice President Kroes chose to address the Netmundial<br>
> outcome draft with a public expression of her opinion. It would have<br>
> been possible for her to express these opinions privately via the HLC,<br>
> but she allowed the broader public to participate in the dialogue by<br>
> making these comments open.<br>
><br>
<br>
</div> I agree this is a good thing.<br>
<div class=""><br>
><br>
><br>
> At a more philosophical level I also have a feeling that her view is<br>
> confusing or incoherent on a specific topic, namely “democratic”<br>
> governance. She speaks repeatedly about “democratic principles” and<br>
> “democratic process,” as do many on this list. However, those principles<br>
> and processes typically are rooted in citizenship in a particular nation<br>
> state with its own (territorially exclusive) legal regime and rights.<br>
> Moreover, democracy in this sense inherently involves a single,<br>
> centralized government. She says this in the context of critiquing or<br>
> expressing reservations about “self-organization.” At the same time, she<br>
</div>> praises “*distributed institutional models for Internet governance,<br>
<div class="">> avoiding centralised solutions as a default.” I find these expressions<br>
> to be contradictory, or at least not well thought-out. Distributed,<br>
> networked governance is never going to be “democratic” in the classic<br>
> sense, and democratic governance is never going to be as distributed and<br>
> flexible as self-organization by engaged stakeholders. There is a<br>
> tradeoff here, and in a transnational context you can’t really call for<br>
> “democracy” unless you are also calling for a centralized world<br>
> government. Kroes is a politician not a political philosopher or<br>
</div>> theorist, but I think it’s important to flag this. ***<br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
Whereas I disagree with her arguments about Democracy and the<br>
Multi-Stakeholder model in that I see it as a form of participatory<br>
democracy that includes the representative democratic ideal of the<br>
individual countries and the varieties of democratic self organization<br>
among the stakeholders to create a richer trans-national form of democracy.<br>
<br>
avri<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
discuss mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:discuss@1net.org">discuss@1net.org</a><br>
<a href="http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss" target="_blank">http://1net-mail.1net.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><br>--<br>I speak only for myself. Sometimes I do not even agree with myself. Keep it in mind.<br>Twitter: @andreaglorioso<br>Facebook: <a href="https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso" target="_blank">https://www.facebook.com/andrea.glorioso</a><br>
LinkedIn: <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro" target="_blank">http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=1749288&trk=tab_pro</a>
</div>