Yeah? Did you ask him for an Apocalypse-based reduction in tuition?
Originally Posted by JudoA
He was probably being metaphorical or talking about how the experience feels subjectively.
Originally Posted by Permalost
Ugh, I wouldn't go to a school that preached politics or religion in class. To hell with that!
There's enough in the way of politics between rival factions in Kyokushin as it is. My response to THAT is to completely ignore the politics or what faction someone is and just interact with anyone I like. Apparently distressing for some, at times, hah.
Politics are a poison. Screw that.
Last edited by Permalost; 3/18/2011 4:35pm at .
Or at least payment in canned goods and duct tape, seeing as how that money'll be useless soon enough.
Originally Posted by Rivington
I wasn't so sure, and I'm kinda familiar with the flowery language of tai chi.
Originally Posted by Rivington
As a general rule, I'd agree with the others that religious or political discourse in an MA class is a no no. Conspiracy theories and alternative medicine, and I'd question whether my instructor knew what he was talking about martially.
Morality and the law, however, are very different. If you are teaching someone potentially lethal techniques (Judo done wrong, over zealous boxing on the streets, muay thai at a biker bar etc.) then I don't see any issue with an instructor tutoring his pupils on the damage they could unwittingly inflict, or the trouble they could get themselves in.
In addition, faculties like common sense, strength of will and intuition can be considered beneficial to both life and fighting. Now, whether one can extrapolate those virtues from the specific to the abstract, and apply them with equal zeal and practicality to the mat and everyday life is a different question. Either way, I think the best part of the training should be in the ring and by example, the rest is just the cherry.
Of course, no one is infallible. Your instructor can't be held up as the ultimate moral authority, and nor should he be. But I think that any serious martial artist should give thought to how the people he teaches might use the abilities he gives them. I think an important benchmark concerning the legitimacy of his tutelage is whether or not it's directly applicable, or whether it's the de-constructed ramblings of a has been trying to garner some sense of self worth from the positive image fostered on him by impressionable young men.
That's my abstract answer to your abstract question about 'martial arts politics'. Or 'what the instructor teaches outside of strictly competence based martial skills' as we seem to have re-appropriated it. Now to the specifics of your instructor:
The guy sounds like a fruit loop. That being said, you don't have anywhere else to train, and he's teaching you well, right? I'm assuming you're an adult. You should thicken up your skin and ignore the guy. You're in a business agreement with him; you're giving him money, he's teaching you jiu-jitsu. As awkward as you might find it, it's not really any different from taking your car to a mechanic and having to listen to him badmouth the jews while he's looking under the hood. Unpleasant? Yes. Relevant? No. Now, if you're not an adult, then I don't necessarily condone him exposing you to the crazy. A big part of the problem with martial art cults and crazies is the mistaken idea that a martial arts instructor is somehow 'special' compared to other people. He's not, and you shouldn't expect him to be. Don't give his craziness any power, just ignore it and continue to hone your physical skills. You wouldn't pay extra heed to a plumber who lectured you on the modern banking system while fixing your shitter, right?