Chain of Command
About: .. on the Chain of Command (Wikipedia)
Currently, it looks like the federal government, if not others, has lost the spirit & distinction of the chain of command. In my experience as Chief Engineer on 3 separate ships & in life & death war time situations I found the distinction necessary to clarify what was to be done & by whom in almost all cases. Examples - if a ship runs aground the captain is responsible regardless of whether the helmsman turned the helm in the wrong direction.
Project II was one leaderless group although from time to time a member would step up and get a project done with the help of other members - lead, follow or get out of the way was the mantra.
The main problem of headlessness is that responsibility disappears or is hidden behind a lack of formality.
Currently:
Questions as to who gave the orders where & when for Benghazi should be clear & crisp since the military follows a chain of command. The commander-in-chief is responsible ultimately & any failures are his & those of his department heads. The same goes for the other scandals of this time in history: IRS criminality, Fast & Furious, Spending beyond budget, AP phone taps, & the crony capitalism of green energy companies.
If there is no accountability, responsibility & traceability in the Federal organization then that is a Huge Clue that the government is too big. The National Debt is already a clue to that.
- The captain is responsible for getting a qualified navigator in place.
- The captain is responsible for issuing written orders to the officer of the deck who gives orders to the helmsman.
- The captain is responsible for having his ship in battle ready condition at all times.
- The captain is responsible for the morale of the ship's crew - enforcing Navy Regs & the UCMJ uniformly.
- What is true for the captain is true for all those beneath him at the department level & down to the lowest seaman.
- There is no excuse for not following an order except that the order violates the UCMJ or Navy Regs
- When a superior issues an order there is no question that it is one. In those questions when the superior detects dissent in the inferior he may follow it by an additional command "that's a direct order" just to clear up the dissent.
Project II was one leaderless group although from time to time a member would step up and get a project done with the help of other members - lead, follow or get out of the way was the mantra.
The main problem of headlessness is that responsibility disappears or is hidden behind a lack of formality.
Currently:
Questions as to who gave the orders where & when for Benghazi should be clear & crisp since the military follows a chain of command. The commander-in-chief is responsible ultimately & any failures are his & those of his department heads. The same goes for the other scandals of this time in history: IRS criminality, Fast & Furious, Spending beyond budget, AP phone taps, & the crony capitalism of green energy companies.
If there is no accountability, responsibility & traceability in the Federal organization then that is a Huge Clue that the government is too big. The National Debt is already a clue to that.
Tags
- headlessness
- chain of command
- item 16521
Comments
Mark de LA says
One other behavior I liked was when I was relieved as chief engineer I gave a full oral & written account of the status of the department. As officer of the deck I also had to report any and all problems with the ship & its current state. The "I didn't know" excuse just didn't work.
There are/were many parallels to the Star Trek series of TV fame. You don't have to be military to get it.
There are/were many parallels to the Star Trek series of TV fame. You don't have to be military to get it.
Mark de LA says
Seth Asks (above): ... Well the IRS, and what they were doing in relation to granting tax
exemptions to organizations, is definitely in the equality domain. Is
that where you also put the military? So are saying that the equality
domain should not be governed from the bottom up, but rather from the
top down in a centralized manner? Is that just you, or is that what
Steiner also says?
... The IRS is just a tax collector according to laws written by Congress. Not equality because everyone would be paying taxes with an equal vested interest in the outcome.
You just have my statements all jumbled up.
Read RS for what he says.
Equality domain of our government seems to be the equal justice before the law regardless of wealth. The economic domain is separate . Top down is for the military.
You just have my statements all jumbled up.
Read RS for what he says.
Equality domain of our government seems to be the equal justice before the law regardless of wealth. The economic domain is separate . Top down is for the military.
Seth says
Well the IRS, and what they were doing in relation to granting tax exemptions to organizations, is definitely in the equality domain. Is that where you also put the military? So are saying that the equality domain should not be governed from the bottom up, but rather from the top down in a centralized manner? Is that just you, or is that what Steiner also says?
M 2013-05-16 06:33:26 16521
seth 2013-05-16 06:08:53 16521
i have always assumed that headlessness is the best way ... it just feels better than dictatorial control. If the spirit of a thing is to be, then it is not necessary for it to be forced into existence by a strong-man ... rather it will just evolve into existence in a grass roots manner.
I am not at all sure why you have associated headlessness with current failure of governmental control in the equality domain. For me that that association, with no explanation of why they are associated, is very confusing.
i have always assumed that headlessness is the best way ... it just feels better than dictatorial control. If the spirit of a thing is to be, then it is not necessary for it to be forced into existence by a strong-man ... rather it will just evolve into existence in a grass roots manner. I am not at all sure why you have associated headlessness with current failure of governmental control in the equality domain. For me that that association, with no explanation of why they are associated, is very confusing. Each domain is best served by the form most suitable to it. The military needs a chain of command - it is not dictatorial as you say; its more like an extreme of positive control. A dictator like Saddam Hussein is capricious & self serving all for one person or one family.
Headlessness is probably a good organization for education & the arts - places where creativity & a wealth of new ideas are likely to sprout.
Something that produces accountability, like for 6+ trillion $$$, needs positive control and strong coordination & efficiency - not headlessness. Headlessness & lack of leadership obfuscates transparency & accountability. Everything in its right place in a threefold way is my aim.
Headlessness is probably a good organization for education & the arts - places where creativity & a wealth of new ideas are likely to sprout.
Something that produces accountability, like for 6+ trillion $$$, needs positive control and strong coordination & efficiency - not headlessness. Headlessness & lack of leadership obfuscates transparency & accountability. Everything in its right place in a threefold way is my aim.
Well the IRS, and what they were doing in relation to granting tax exemptions to organizations, is definitely in the equality domain. Is that where you also put the military? So are saying that the equality domain should not be governed from the bottom up, but rather from the top down in a centralized manner? Is that just you, or is that what Steiner also says?
Mark de LA says
seth 2013-05-16 06:08:53 16521
i have always assumed that headlessness is the best way ... it just feels better than dictatorial control. If the spirit of a thing is to be, then it is not necessary for it to be forced into existence by a strong-man ... rather it will just evolve into existence in a grass roots manner.
I am not at all sure why you have associated headlessness with current failure of governmental control in the equality domain. For me that that association, with no explanation of why they are associated, is very confusing.
i have always assumed that headlessness is the best way ... it just feels better than dictatorial control. If the spirit of a thing is to be, then it is not necessary for it to be forced into existence by a strong-man ... rather it will just evolve into existence in a grass roots manner. I am not at all sure why you have associated headlessness with current failure of governmental control in the equality domain. For me that that association, with no explanation of why they are associated, is very confusing. Each domain is best served by the form most suitable to it. The military needs a chain of command - it is not dictatorial as you say; its more like an extreme of positive control. A dictator like Saddam Hussein is capricious & self serving all for one person or one family.
Headlessness is probably a good organization for education & the arts - places where creativity & a wealth of new ideas are likely to sprout.
Something that produces accountability, like for 6+ trillion $$$, needs positive control and strong coordination & efficiency - not headlessness. Headlessness & lack of leadership obfuscates transparency & accountability. Everything in its right place in a threefold way is my aim.
Headlessness is probably a good organization for education & the arts - places where creativity & a wealth of new ideas are likely to sprout.
Something that produces accountability, like for 6+ trillion $$$, needs positive control and strong coordination & efficiency - not headlessness. Headlessness & lack of leadership obfuscates transparency & accountability. Everything in its right place in a threefold way is my aim.
Mark de LA says
M 2013-05-16 07:51:26 16521
It is often confusing consider this from GW (last sentence mostly)
the above is mine.
P.2470 #51,1 80-2-2-14-8-58-THU (A Valentine's Day 30.43 years ago or 30/5/5 ago) " ... Dai yot yao gih VUNG, Abundant, Sun of Fire, Tipareth of Geburah; Full Realisation of the Will; One should meditate on Progress; kon P.1884 & P.1691; both the QBL & the Cabalistic meaning of all the comment of both indicated peen & at the same time realise the difference of aspects between the physical & the superphysical spheres. Plato, Pythagoras & especially the author of the Apocalypse & in later times such Adepts as Blavatsky, & Rudolph Steiner taught about the secrets of Number. While there is some distortion & enigma in their writings extant, as well as in reports about such leaders as the Count St. Germain, Cagliostro, Francis Bacon, Wm. Shakespeare etc, some of which we intend to clear up, yet there are many clues which can be followed up by such earnest students as yourselves. In the mean while may you dwell in the somatic fraternity, psychic liberty & spiritual equality which achieves the Great Work!"
~ do a facebook search for threefold - lots of confusion; mostly because of context.
the above is mine.
See Also
- Thought Threefoldness ... with 19 viewings related by tag "item 16521".
- Thought Threefold Headlessness with 0 viewings related by tag "headlessness".