Military management as an alternative to civil

[rupol2000]

The problem with civilian managers is that it is difficult to assess their performance. First, if the manager satisfies the higher authorities, he usually stays in place, and it is not known how much more efficiently someone else in his place could work. Secondly, there are funds in civil administration that cover all mistakes.

If we would take military officers and police officers of who have shown themselves well in organizing hostilitiesin the civil administration , we could improve the quality of civilian management, including executive power, because in war it is better to see who is who, and it is easier to assess abilities.

 

[Moonglow]

I can tell you are bereft of any knowledge of how incompetent military leaders are.

 

[Crepitus]

The problem with civilian managers is that it is difficult to assess their performance. First, if the manager satisfies the higher authorities, he usually stays in place, and it is not known how much more efficiently someone else in his place could work. Secondly, there are funds in civil administration that cover all mistakes.

If we would take military officers and police officers of who have shown themselves well in organizing hostilitiesin the civil administration , we could improve the quality of civilian management, including executive power, because in war it is better to see who is who, and it is easier to assess abilities.

A. Most military leaders aren't all.that competent.

B. If you happen to find one that is the mindset is all wrong. Civil management isn't a battle.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

The problem with civilian managers is that it is difficult to assess their performance. First, if the manager satisfies the higher authorities, he usually stays in place, and it is not known how much more efficiently someone else in his place could work. Secondly, there are funds in civil administration that cover all mistakes.

If we would take military officers and police officers of who have shown themselves well in organizing hostilitiesin the civil administration , we could improve the quality of civilian management, including executive power, because in war it is better to see who is who, and it is easier to assess abilities.

Such is the neo-fascist authoritarian right, advocates of military totalitarianism.

 

[rupol2000]

Such is the neo-fascist authoritarian right, advocates of military totalitarianism.

No, the Nazis and authoritarian authorities are purely left-wing and mostly civil.

 

[Lesh]

If we would take military officers and police officers of who have shown themselves well in organizing hostilitiesin the civil administration

What language was that translated from?

 

[Dragonlady]

The problem with civilian managers is that it is difficult to assess their performance. First, if the manager satisfies the higher authorities, he usually stays in place, and it is not known how much more efficiently someone else in his place could work. Secondly, there are funds in civil administration that cover all mistakes.

If we would take military officers and police officers of who have shown themselves well in organizing hostilitiesin the civil administration , we could improve the quality of civilian management, including executive power, because in war it is better to see who is who, and it is easier to assess abilities.

 

[kyzr]

What language was that translated from?

I think he's a manic German.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

The problem with civilian managers is that it is difficult to assess their performance. First, if the manager satisfies the higher authorities, he usually stays in place, and it is not known how much more efficiently someone else in his place could work. Secondly, there are funds in civil administration that cover all mistakes.

If we would take military officers and police officers of who have shown themselves well in organizing hostilitiesin the civil administration , we could improve the quality of civilian management, including executive power, because in war it is better to see who is who, and it is easier to assess abilities.

Interestingly enough WalMart tired this about a decade ago. They targeted junior officers/senior enlisted getting out and hired them to be Shift Managers, one step below the store manager. In the St Louis area they hired 13 such people and within less than 2 years not a single one was left. Not because they did not do well, but because they were too efficient and were a threat to the managers. The managers were pissed that people with less than 2 years with the company were competing for the same positions as they were. The guy at WalMart HQ that started the program left and then program was scrapped.

 

[Dragonlady]

No, the Nazis and authoritarian authorities are purely left-wing and mostly civil.

There is most definitely a mechanism in place for judging the performance of elected officials and that is public elections.

I cannot think of a single right wing authoritarian military dictatorship that produced a successful economy or a government that did a good job on behalf of its people.

And let’s just be perfectly clear here: the Nazis were an extreme right wing authoritarian dictatorship. There was nothing “leftist” about them.

 

[Rigby5]

The problem with civilian managers is that it is difficult to assess their performance. First, if the manager satisfies the higher authorities, he usually stays in place, and it is not known how much more efficiently someone else in his place could work. Secondly, there are funds in civil administration that cover all mistakes.

If we would take military officers and police officers of who have shown themselves well in organizing hostilitiesin the civil administration , we could improve the quality of civilian management, including executive power, because in war it is better to see who is who, and it is easier to assess abilities.

NEVER do we want any military involvement in government or anything really.
Military personnel are always the most incompetent because in the military there is always a "need to know" secrecy and to "always just follow orders".
That causes those who do well in the military to be of very questionable morals and extremely lacking in personal initiative.

I personally believe anyone from the military should be excluded from being in police for example, because they have been taught what essentially are illegal "rules of engagement".
In the military, you are supposed to murder the enemy.
In civilian life, you as police are supposed to work for the civilians you encounter.

 

[rupol2000]

dictatorship

I didn't talk about dictatorship

And let’s just be perfectly clear here: the Nazis were an extreme right wing authoritarian dictatorship. There was nothing “leftist” about them.

Nazism was born in the Prussian state of Bismarck, it was almost communism. Hitlerite Germany was not right, it just shifted slightly to the right for the sake of populism.

 

[rupol2000]

"always just follow orders"

This is exactly what is characteristic of modern dumb managers.

In fact, the officers have enough initiative, and the more professional the army is, the more they take on themselves.

 

[dudmuck]

I didn't talk about dictatorship


Nazism was born in the Prussian state of Bismarck, it was almost communism. Hitlerite Germany was not right, it just shifted slightly to the right for the sake of populism.

the origins of Nazism is volkisch nationalism and racism. there was otto van bismarck, which had something called "state socialism" which was a conservative ideology opposed to actual socialism. Bismarck is a person, not a place.
As far as Nazism, they considered judaism and marxism directly connected, which means both communism and judaism were considered in the most negative way possible.

 

[rupol2000]

he origins of Nazism is volkisch nationalism and racism. there was otto van bismarck, which had something called "state socialism" which was a conservative ideology opposed to actual socialism. Bismarck is a person, not a place.

No, this is not only a person, it is the Prussian spirit of collectivism.

 

[rupol2000]

opposed to actual socialism

There is no real opposition to socialism, Socialism in its modern sense is Prussianism. Economy and society under the control of government officials. Including the army

 

[rupol2000]

In an army of the Prussian type, officers are simply officials (analogous to the Bolshevik commissars). The very word “officer” comes from here. This is just an official, an office worker, not a military man. Although now the word "officer", have opposite meaning. But the origin is precisely from here.