[WSIS CS-Plenary] YJ's objection and the CS-PS statement

[Meryem Marzouki]

Hi all,

I would like to back Lisa's demand that signatures be gathered in 
support of the CS-PS document, so that it doesn't appear as being 
supported by CS as a whole (whatever CS is exactly...).

Yes, Milton, Lisa's message is not based on a substantive critique of 
the statement itself, but rather on the fact that it is a CS-PS joint 
statement. I share Lisa's position, and my organization wont sign 
either such a document.
A CS-PS joint statement is different from a statement on a specific 
issue signed by some CS organizations together with some private sector 
organizations, in that the former implies a kind of coalition and, 
moreover, a fair and balanced joined coalition of forces sharing a 
vision (is that the current situation?!), not simply agreeing on a 
specific issue or matter.

And yes, the private sector is heterogeneous, but perhaps not as much 
as CS, which is a kind of "fourre-tout", defined as anything but 
governements (for sure, although having local gov/authorities included 
in CS is quite strange to me) and private sector (not quite sure of 
this, when looking at, e.g. CS @ WSIS). However, what is sure is that 
CCBI/ICC is rather homogeneous, at least in its positions, vision, and 
influence. If the idea is to have an understanding of the CS concept 
closer to the French one (historically, i.e. CS is anything but 
governements/state entities) than to the anglo-saxon one, then, yes, 
private sector is part of CS, but we have to make clear this 
understanding of concepts (and let's set up a CS "private sector 
caucus", then, as one of my dearest friends who'll recognize herself 
proposed:-))

Furthermore, I've a question for you, Milton : you said "When most 
activists in CS and PS can agree [...] they win. When most activists in 
CS are aligned against government(s) and PS, they lose. Think about 
it." What do you mean exactly? Should we fight only for issues on which 
we may agree with private sector and, even better, with governements 
too? Why fighting then? Let's only be their alibi for more legitimacy.
My question is most probably for after PrepCom2, when we'll have time 
to discuss in deeper details this kind of issues, like 
"multistakeholderism", "consensus", "civil society"... :-)

Cheers,
Meryel

Le vendredi, 25 fév 2005, à 06:28 Europe/Paris, Milton Mueller a écrit :

>
> Lisa's message is couched as a critique of the CS-PS statement, but
> never bothers to identify anything wrong with the substance of the
> statement. Let us not forget that the statement basically called for a
> "multi-stakeholder" followup "composed through an open and inclusive
> process, with particular attention to achieving gender balance and
> equitable regional representation." If the CCBI are with us on that,
> good for them.
>
> Lacking any substantive critique, the negativity must come from the
> premise that any cooperation with business interests is wrong. I
> personally have no sympathy for that view.
>
> First, businesses are as heterogeneous as civil society in their
> approach to information society issues.
>
> Second, in communication-information policy, there is a very clear
> pattern over the years. When most activists in CS and PS can agree (for
> example, on opposing the Clinton Administration's Clipper chip or the
> Communications Decency Act) they win. When most activists in CS are
> aligned against government(s) and PS, they lose. Think about it.
>
>
>
> Dr. Milton Mueller
> Syracuse University School of Information Studies
> http://www.digital-convergence.org
> http://www.internetgovernance.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Plenary mailing list
> Plenary at wsis-cs.org
> http://mailman.greennet.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/plenary
>