Where are the checks and where is the oversight in Aikido? I think it's self evident that there is no system in place in the Aikikai - it's entirely a system of delegation down the line. The doctors are subject to a system of checks and accreditation, the same as the universities above.
What kind of system of oversight are you talking about? The Aikikai is certainly subject to legal and financial checks and regulations and even has to be careful about certain things to maintain its status as a non-religious organisation. I think you are suggesting is that people not of aikido, should assess all the different flavours of aikido.
You picked a source that is riddled with mistakes and distortions but one thing the author complains about in the article you linked to is actually the einstructors and committeesf and even ginterferenceh by the Aikikai in collusion with other organisations such as JICA. Isnft that a (flawed) story of oversight, regulation and review of the multiple lineages I mentioned by the peers who gather around the iemoto
lineage of the founderfs organisation?
It seems that cost and interference are most peoplefs gripes and more regulation, free insurance, perks for members etc isnft going to help that.
For the record, one of the many mistakes in your source is the description of the application process to teach aikido for JICA (the Japanese equivalent of the Peace Corps). The minimum level to apply is not black belt, it is nidan
and even then it is a long hard process, not just the alleged short seminar at hombu
. Your source also alleges that many donft bother to learn the local language of the country they go to. This ignores the application and ongoing training requirements. For example, a friend of mine went to teach aikido for JICA in Africa and needed English and French just to apply and he had to take courses in two local languages before commencing and during his assignment.
But I am very familiar with your sourcefs inaccuracies, having arrived in former-Iwama town in 2006, not long after taisai
My point was that Stan Pranin has very clearly demonstrated that the post-war Aikikai (and even Morihei Ueshiba) made some questionable actions if you're talking about strictly adhering to the rules of etiquette and lineage in their relationship with Sokaku Takeda and the historical place of Daito-ryu.
So theyfre not allowed to use a traditional model for the transmission of the art because of the tatemae
playing down of Daito Ryu as main parent art?