Monday, July 30, 2012

Jesus & Nonviolence

The non-aggression principle is fundamental, and of course the rule is thou shall not kill. But is nonviolence fundamental?

John 2:13-16
English Standard Version (ESV)
Jesus Cleanses the Temple
13  The Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 14  In the temple he found those who were selling oxen and sheep and pigeons, and the money-changers sitting there. 15 And making a whip of cords, he drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and oxen. And he poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables. 16 And he told those who sold the pigeons, “Take these things away; do not make my Father's house a house of trade.”

Jesus came upon clear, active, present wrongdoing, and literally whipped the malefactors and overturned their tables.  The dove sellers he told to split with their wares (overturning the cages might hurt the doves and carefully letting each one go would take a lot of time, or perhaps, he was not about to destroy anyone's property.)

The aggressors are the ones who abused the temple.  I think this is a case of righteous indignation,  in which on enthusiastically engages in "game on."

Sunday, July 29, 2012

The Eight Directions of an Assault

In aikido we train long and hard on the eight directs from which an attack can emanate.  We drill before each lesson moving quickly through all eight directions (think N S E W NE SW NW SW) and with the jo and bo, and of course ran dori is an exercise in defending from the eight directions an attack might come.

In aikido you go straight at the attacker.  There is no blocking, just tenkan, irimi, tenchi nage, tsudori  or tomoe nage if you cannot turn.  But we usually train as if the attacker is coming straight at us, when in fact in real life that should be only 1 in 8 fight situations.  7 of 8 conflicts we should find ourselves oblique to the attacker.  This is where ran dori training is an exercise in dealing pacifying an attacker who is not coming at your.  Like a gun man in a theatre.

In ran dori, ("ran" being "chaos"), if you are practicing right, some seven of eight people you drop should be ones who did not quite see you coming.  You should be setting yourself up with each direct attack to be positioned to nail someone next who is not ready for you. This generally involved throwing people into other people, and going at the thick of the body of attackers but performing irimi or tenkan on the body of attackers collectively.

Here is a good randori, with a couple of tsudori incorporated.  He obviously is stepping back rather than in as he should, because never stepping back means people get smacked hard. This fellow has no compunction in smacking hard, but he seems to be disinclined to work the edges. After four attackers, 5, 6, 7 or 8 really is not different.  Anyway, something between the two.

Such take downs normally involved elements of kokyunage, yonkyo, and the neglected "Tohei hop" at seconds 31 to 34, for example.)

Aikido has its critics, which tend to miss an essential point of aikido: it is about pacifying, not defeating.  If your number is up, it is up.  But at no time are we called to passively submit to evil.  We are called to pacify aggression.  Going straight at an attacker may end in defeat, the the process provides some opportunity to reduce the threat, allowing others to build on your work at pacification.  If your number is up, it is up.  It is not the aikidoists who are delusional about fighting styles, it is those who think one system is superior to another. Martial artists are trained to address threats directly.  Whether it is head on or from one of the other seven direction to intercede, in aikido you go straight at the threat.

Practice on!

Tuesday, July 24, 2012

One way or another...

Will Grigg has a fine summary:

It’s tempting to think that in addition to Dickens and Lean, the Nolan Brothers might have drawn inspiration from Carlos Marighella’s Mini-Manual for the Urban Guerrilla, which provided tactical guidance for generations of terrorists. (Interestingly, the Nolans compared Bane to Argentine Marxist mass-murderer Che Guevara.)
The purpose of terrorism, explained Marighella, is to "to intensify repression," resulting in draconian measures that "make life unbearable" for the subject population. When faced with "revolutionary violence," government will eagerly resort to "police roundups, house searches, arrests of innocent people [that] make life in the city unbearable…. " Rejecting the "so-called political solution," the urban guerrilla must become more aggressive and violent, resorting without letup to sabotage, terrorism, expropriations, assaults, kidnappings, and executions, heightening the disastrous situation in which the government must act…."
Giangiacomo Feltrinelli, a millionaire Marxist publishing magnate, published Marighella’s tract and gave it wide international circulation. He concisely summarized Marighella’s strategy as the use of relentless violence against the innocent in order to provoke an "authoritarian turn to the right" – the imposition of dictatorial measures and the consolidation of power by a State apparatus that will fall into the hands of the revolutionaries.

How about we just get rid of usury?

Friday, July 20, 2012

Irresponsible Movie-Goers

News reports tell us a gunman entered a crowded theatre showing the hyper-violent latest Batman movie and opened fire.  A terribly sad thing.

News reports call this a tragedy.  Odd that.  A tragedy is when a hero has some fault that brings him down.  This was not a tragedy, this was a crime, murder.

The people in the theatre must believe in violence to solve problems, which is the theme of the trilogy.  Yet no one in the theatre was armed?  How strange.

It is a problem when people do not take responsibility for their views.  If you believe violence is the response to violence, then you should be prepared to meet violence with violence, that is, be armed.

Yes, the state has arrogated unto itself a monopoly on violence, but that is a mistake when seconds count and the police are minutes away.

Conscientious objectors take responsibility for their views.  Too many of those who believe in violence, even watch movies glorifying violence, do not.

Thursday, July 19, 2012

China To Attack India in 2012?

A question for top level diplomats from Indian reporters is on the question as to whether India will be attacked by China in 2012.  India is burying a story about a US Ship that fired on a fishing boat and killed an Indian fisherman.  Strange world.

If there is a war, expect it to be USA/India vs. Pakistan/China.  It does not have to be this way.

Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Our Future?

Great acting from the early sixties, interesting problem, 25 minute video.

Saturday, July 14, 2012

Responsibility of People Who Advocate Violence

Obviously conscientious objectors do not initiate violence.  But there is plenty of violence about.  People who believe violence can be initiated, or should be used in the face of threat should take the responsibility for their beliefs and prepare accordingly.  They really ought not tax the rest of us to pay for people who will advance their agendas.  They should take responsibility to master the means and equip themselves to deal with violence themselves.

Here a young lady had a concern about boys bothering her at the beach.

No boys bothered her at the beach.  This is what I am talking about.

Saturday, July 7, 2012

Just Cause and Just War

Just cause is the reason for going to war, and just war is how you prosecute it. With neither, all you have is murder.

Sunday, July 1, 2012

Pentagon PR

My mother was head of al-qaeda at her old folks home, and #2 in the al-qaeda organization worldwide, until she was killed in a drone attack by the US Government.

Of course this is nonsense, but such fanciful stories are easy to write, and the amazing thing is how often people will pause as they consider the story, wondering at the veracity.  Try this:  tell people that about your mom, and see how long before they grin at the absurdity of it.

The fact they are not dismissing it as you say it, the fact they have to wonder for whatever amount of time, tells you just how absurd our society has become.

One reason is the half billion a year the pentagon alone spends on misinforming us.