 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Troy's comments about the first direct global elections in history:
Finally a useful precedent to manage human affairs on the global level: these elections were historical because they are the first direct global elections and whatever some ICANN leaders think, ICANN is leading the way and exploring a new "democracy space" in global governance. That this happens in cyberspace is totally appropriate of course, but we will have to come to it in physical space as well. Already, I see many useful lessons which can be applied in physical space when direct global elections are held for a world parliament, as well as useful lessons from the way ICANN itself is managed (e.g. the transparency of communication where everything is recorded, archived, put on a web site for anyone to see, which is a huge contrast to even the US Congress which does not put US laws on the Internet). World Democracy puts to rest the 50s fantasy (but still widespread) that a world government must be a world dictatorship. In fact, world democracy will probably be a series of overlapping global institutions with different structures and mandates, some functional like ICANN and some closer to the congresses and parliaments we now know. The benefits will be clear: a freely and directly elected representing the citizens of the world will provide the legitimacy needed to bodies such as WTO, the UN, the World Bank and satisfy the thirst for accountability people have. And technology will ensure that the equation "world government = world dictatorship" will be obsolete once, as Hawkins (co-founder of Palm and then of Handspring) predicted, we will be able to afford to give away to everyone on the planet (for much much less than present military expenditures) a high bandwidth wireless handheld with "essentially free" service. Dropping a million of WAP-phones pre-programmed in Korean on North Korea would do more to destroy dictatorship there (or in Libya, Iraq etc.) than the billions spend today on conventional or missile defence against those few "rogue states" do.
Karl Auerbach, Salon.com, Oct. 16, 2000
ICANN is a new experiment in international government. There's no source of authority for that. The only place it's going to come from is historical acceptance, and the only way it's going to get that is by doing things that are right, so that over time, people say, "You know, ICANN's doing the right thing." They'll just come to accept it, and ICANN will grow to power by that means. To do that, you have to get people to accept the decisions and to accept that they've had a meaningful participation.
Dana Blankenhorn, The Election is Over, ClickZ, October 16, 2000
,
Yeah, you thought there were weeks to go yet. But you missed it. The election of 2000 has ended, the votes have been cast, and the winner is... Karl Auerbach…?... Auerbach's new position is legislative in nature.
He's one of five new ICANN directors elected last week from different regions of the world…?... This is going to be a very interesting legislative body…?...Most important (to me, at least) is that Auerbach understands that
ICANN is a governmental body and that, at present, it is actually very undemocratic. In a speech at Harvard's Kennedy School in May, he was clear-headed and forthright. "ICANN's organic documents - its Articles of
Incorporation and By-laws - are apparently not worth the paper they are printed on," he said.
Dana Blankenhorn, Despite Esther Dyson's best efforts, and a streamlined "dispute resolution" procedure that has drawn praise , the Internet Committee on Assigned Names and Numbers can't help but evolve into the first
world government. I use that term advisedly but deliberately, knowing the phrase "world government" carries with it a ton of baggage, as well as controversy, hoopla and pain. But ICANN has power, real power, and its
procedures for handling that power include a real election that is taking place right now.
The power of people over that election is limited. Insiders will maintain a controlling block of votes even after this election. But
if "insider" candidates like Lawrence Lessig are overwhelmed by member-nominated candidates such as Emerson Tiller it will send the same message as a "no confidence" motion against any other government.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Designed by AnyaDavis.com