The Infrastructure of Democracy

[David Farber <dave () farber net>]

------ Forwarded Message
From: Joichi Ito <jito () neoteny com>
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 19:05:54 +0100
To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>
Subject: The Infrastructure of Democracy

Just blogged this, but thought your list might find this interesting.

http://joi.ito.com/archives/2005/03/10/the_infrastructure_of_democracy.html

The Infrastructure of Democracy

I am at this moment co-moderating the Democracy, Terrorism and the Open
Internet panel at the Club de Madrid International Summit on Democracy,
Terrorism and Security with Marko Ahtisaari. We worked all day yesterday
drafting a document we are calling "The Infrastructure of Democracy". The
draft is currently available on the Global Voices wiki. Please give us some
feedback.

Special thanks to Martin Varsavsky for giving us the opportunity and to John
Perry Barlow, John Gage, Dan Gillmor, Chris Goggans, Pekka Himanen, David
Isenberg, Rebecca MacKinnon, Andrew McLaughlin, Desiree Miloshevic, Jeff
Moss, Ejovi Nuwere, Kazuhisa Ogawa, Marc Rotenberg, David Smith, Wendy
Seltzer, Gohsuke Takama, Noriko Takiguchi, Paul Vixie, David Weinberger and
Ethan Zuckerman who came all the way to Madrid to work on this. Thanks also
to the other people in the room who contributed.

---

The Infrastructure of Democracy
Strengthening the Open Internet for a Safer World
March 11, 2005

I. The Internet is a foundation of democratic society in the 21st century,
because the core values of the Internet and democracy are so closely
aligned.

1. The Internet is fundamentally about openness, participation, and freedom
of expression for all - increasing the diversity and reach of information
and ideas.
2. The Internet allows people to communicate and collaborate across borders
and belief systems.
3. The Internet unites families and cultures in diaspora; it connects
people, helping them to form civil societies.
4. The Internet can foster economic development by connecting people to
information and markets.
5. The Internet introduces new ideas and views to those who may be isolated
and prone to political violence.
6. The Internet is neither above nor below the law. The same legal
principles that apply in the physical world also apply to human activities
conducted over the Internet.


II. Decentralized systems - the power of many - can combat decentralized
foes.

1. Terrorist networks are highly decentralized and distributed. A
centralized effort by itself cannot effectively fight terrorism.
2. Terrorism is everyone's issue. The internet connects everyone. A
connected citizenry is the best defense against terrorist propaganda.
3. As we saw in the aftermath of the March 11 bombing, response was
spontaneous and rapid because the citizens were able to use the Internet to
organize themselves.
4. As we are seeing in the distributed world of weblogs and other kinds of
citizen media, truth emerges best in open conversation among people with
divergent views.


III. The best response to abuses of openness is more openness.

1. Open, transparent environments are more secure and more stable than
closed, opaque ones.
2. While Internet services can be interrupted, the Internet as a global
system is ultimately resilient to attacks, even sophisticated and widely
distributed ones.
3. The connectedness of the Internet ­ people talking with people ­ counters
the divisiveness terrorists are trying to create.
4. The openness of the Internet may be exploited by terrorists, but as with
democratic governments, openness minimizes the likelihood of terrorist acts
and enables effective responses to terrorism.


IV. Well-meaning regulation of the Internet in established democracies could
threaten the development of emerging democracies.

1. Terrorism cannot destroy the internet, but over-zealous legislation in
response to terrorism could. Governments should consider mandating changes
to core Internet functionality only with extraordinary caution.
2. Some government initiatives that look reasonable in fact violate the
basic principles that have made the Internet a success.
3. For example, several interests have called for an end to anonymity. This
would be highly unlikely to stop determined terrorists, but it would have a
chilling effect on political activity and thereby reduce freedom and
transparency. Limiting anonymity would have a cascading series of unintended
results that would hurt freedom of expression, especially in countries
seeking transition to democratic rule.


V. In conclusion we urge those gathered here in Madrid to:

1. Embrace the open Internet as a foundation of 21st Century democracy, and
a critical tool in the fight against terrorism.
2. Recognizing the Internet's value as a critical communications
infrastructure, invest to strengthen it against attacks and recover quickly
from damage.
3. Work to spread access more evenly, aggressively addressing the Digital
Divide, and to provide Internet access for all.
4. To protect free speech and association, endorse the availability of
anonymous communications for all.
5. Resist attempts at international governance of the Internet: It can
introduce processes that have unintended effects and violate the bottom-up
democratic nature of the Net.


--
Blog http://joi.ito.com/
Wiki http://joiwiki.ito.com/
Travel http://joiwiki.ito.com/joiwiki/index.cgi?joi_s_travel



------ End of Forwarded Message

-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as lists-ip () insecure org
To manage your subscription, go to
  http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip

Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/