I have recently moved to Mexico, Guadalajara, for a mid term stay. Yesterday I noticed some helicopters and some extra traffic jams so I figured something big was going on…and yes. There is a meeting of the ONU’s International Telecommunication Union with some 60 telecommunication ministers from around the globe coming to disrupt everyday life (and paths) of Guadalajara citizens. No big issue. Disrupting everyday life might be enjoyable (to some extent). But then, I just learned I won’t be able to reach my house without proper authorization as I am living in a potentially attractive site to commit silly acts regarding the inaugural events of the ITU… whoa….

from en.wikipedia.org
I will be gifted with some sort of security card to let security guys know I do, in fact, live here so they can let me pass. This, of course, raises the question about who manages public space. But, to a more profound analysis, it does resonate with some ideas about Issue-Networks and Dewey / Lippman pragmatists approaches such as those present in Noortje Marres Ph.D.
“A democratic deficit must then be said to arise when bad issue displacements occur: when issues that depend on public involvement for their settlement are transported to locations that are inaccessible to publics, making their involvement in issue formation, and thus settlement of affairs, impossible.” (Marres, 2005)
On the next page of her Ph.D;
“Issues challenge existing modes of democratic political organization: if these issues are to be addressed, forms for organizing subjects and articulating problems must be reinvented” (Marres, 2005)
¿Is it not strange enough that, not only to enter an event such as ITU meeting, but even to access their homes, citizens do face inaccessibilities?
It is as if all sort of events as ITU meetings or NATO, G8, G20 ones were taking place at the constant risk of “not taking place”. I mean, there is a large believe and concern from security corps. that someones do not want these events to take place. And literally, they DO TAKE places. City under sieges, citizens under scrutiny. And, yes, quite often the public wants to be involved and, in absence of any other fora, they do public demonstrations or press conferences.
Paradoxically enough, these type of world wide meetings parallel Michel Callon confined research notion so as to think of a confined politics. (either case, Michel Callon notion of confined research parallels confined politics, in a similar way that technical representation comes exemplified jointly with political representation). But further explaining these would need another post…
That said, and to give some sense of place, I am writing via a conventional ISP located in Mexico, Megacable – Megared. Which works with cable Internet technology. Not bad, you could say. Well, yes, not bad. Cable bandwidth is not Fiber Optics, but it is not bad. However, They offer 2 and 3 mb (download speeds) connections…According to some net forums, they do share IP connections amongst different customers, jamming the bandwidth dedicated to one single-user with other ones…Oh…and they also block ftp ports so you are kind of obliged to contract their services if you want to run a ftp server…hummm…¿net neutrality? What was that again aiming at?
good to remember.
RAX!
sharing is a pleasure; giving credit too: