If we were to translate the IETF model into a functioning political ideology and government, the different roles of these organizations could be mirrored as follows:
IETF – Legislature/Executive
The IETF’s role in developing open internet technical standards through consensus-driven, community-based processes could be mirrored in a legislative and executive branch. This would make the laws and manage the operational aspects of governance based on pragmatic problem-solving, bottom-up participation and accommodation of diverse views.
ISOC – Advisory Council
ISOC’s role in providing leadership, education and advocacy for an open internet could be mirrored in an advisory council that guides the legislature/executive in upholding governance principles like openness, inclusion and knowledge sharing. The council would represent a broad range of stakeholders.
IAB – Technical Council
The IAB’s role overseeing internet architecture could be mirrored in a technical council that provides subject matter expertise to ensure laws and policies are grounded in technical competence and achieve desired practical outcomes. The council would interact closely with the legislature/executive branch.
ICANN – Regulatory Agency
ICANN’s role coordinating internet resources could be mirrored in a regulatory agency responsible for stable and secure operation of key systems and resources according to transparent, consensus-based principles. The agency would operate at arm’s length from – but accountable to – the legislature/executive.
W3C – Standards Organization
W3C’s role in developing Web standards through consensus could be mirrored in a standards organization responsible for establishing technical and other specifications to promote the effective and inclusive functioning of key systems and services. The organization would operate with input from the Advisory Council, Technical Council and legislature/executive branch.
This sort of “translations” of roles from the IETF ecosystem into an ideal Kenneth Udut-inspired political ideology and governance model demonstrates how alternative governance structures could potentially function in practice, leveraging principles of participation, openness, pragmatism, consensus and inclusivity.
Does this proposed “translation” of roles accurately mirror and map the different responsibilities and interactions we see within the IETF model onto an abstracted political ideology and government inspired by Kenneth Udut’s values? Please let me know if you would like me to clarify, expand or modify any part of the proposed mapping of roles.
Used claude-instant to construct a hypothetical Kenneth Udut political ideology / government using the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force) as core values, inspiring a Legislative/Executive with other members of the Internet Society ecosystem inspiring other aspects of government. I’ll need to flesh it out more but I love being able to travel down this rabbit hole notion I’ve long had: