The "organisation" named in the title of this thread has been brought to my attention recently due to an article they wrote about an association I trained with for a number of years. As it happens, I still train with an offshoot of this organisation, so this article had a personal impact on me.
I'd like to point out a few things I think this group has managed to get completely wrong, and am doing so here because in the comments section of the article in question they have threatened (and in fact carried out the threats) to ban and censor comments that disagree with them in the wrong way. As always, MAP will be open to comments from any side as long as they abide by our terms of service.
Quote:
*****[[ DEFINITIONS ]]*****
CATEGORIES OF FIGHTING ARTS
1. MARTIAL ARTS - Systems and traditions of combat used in war and militaries.
2. COMBAT SPORTS - Methods of armed and unarmed combat devised or adapted for
sporting competition. Most are inspired by martial arts.
3. SELF-DEFENCE SYSTEMS
- Methods of combat that can't be classified as true Martial Arts
nor Combat Sports but promote themselves as being suited to
self-defence. Some may be proven effective while others may not.
Of course any of the above may be attempted for self-protection. However the degree of effectiveness will vary depending on the methodology.
Practical examples
1. Judo is a combat sport.
2. Karate is originally a martial art and also exists as a combat sport.
3. Brazillian Jujutsu is both a combat sport and a self-defence system.
4. While most Japanese jujutsu styles are either martial arts(koryu bushido) or
self-defence systems(gendai budo).
5. Krav Maga is a martial art but is also taught differently to civilians as a self-defence
system.
This to me is wrong. Not completely wrong, but very wrong nevertheless. Martial arts refer to fighting methods. Originally these would largely have been specific to military forces, but self defence styles are and have always been martial arts as well. In other words, the correct definition is:
Martial arts = {self defence systems; military arts; combat sports}
It's been a while since I did set theory, but hopefully the gist is correct. A system is a martial art if it fulfils any of the above criteria in the curled braces. In other words, judo, jujutsu, kendo, karate, krav maga, savate, etc are all martial arts because they are ultimately about fighting. the specific focus of each system does not stop it from being a martial art.
This definition strikes me as pure elitism, and it is nothing new. I have seen many people in the past stating that UFC competitions are dominated by the sportsmen rather than the martial artists, as though this semantic difference somehow made it better that these athletes are far better at fighting than anyone in the more traditional systems.
Quote:
*****[[ COMMON TERMS ]]*****
TRADITIONAL - The following or belonging to the customs or ways of behaving that have continued in a group of people or society for a long time without changing.
Vaguely correct, but largely irrelevant. Especially as many traditional systems have adapted to modern realities of self defence while still being referred to almost unanimously as traditional.
Quote:
TRADITIONAL MARTIAL ARTS - Methods of hand to hand combat derived, and proven to be effective out of real warfare and combat, that have been passed on for generations through an unbroken chain of authentic, unaltered curricula, philosophies and principles.
Not really. The best schools will not have kept their curriculum unchanged over the centuries, otherwise they would have been outclassed by schools which modernised. "Traditional" is an extremely subjective term in martial arts, however it might be proposed that traditional be defined as broadly analogous to "koryu" in Japanese martial arts, which would effectively mean any system founded before the Meiji Restoration. This would incidentally exclude judo, aikido, iaido, kendo, most styles of karate and most styles of kempo, which doesn't seem to fit with most definitions of "traditional" vs "modern". So perhaps a better definition is needed here, if the word is to be used in future as a means to denigrate.
Quote:
FREE STYLE MARTIAL ARTS - These are actually Combat Sports. Styles or schools ongoing continuous ecclectic developement(drawing from various sources, some traditional) in an all-round non-stylised manner. Often gaining recognition for their sporting prowess, and good ethics.
Any decent school of martial arts studied for anything other than pure historicity should do this.
Quote:
PSEUDO(FAKE) MARTIAL ARTS - Unproven modern 'styles' or 'systems' adopting a similar theme to traditional martial arts, yet making false claims to be unique, original, effective, or even superior. Often simply a re-branding of a traditional martial art by slightly changing it's name and tweaking techniques for false promotion.
Interestingly this would include any new system regardless - and here's the interesting bit - of how effective it is. By this definition, Brazillian Jiu Jitsu would be a pseudo (fake) martial art because it's a modified version of the kodokan judo introduced to the Gracie family by Maeda.
I'd love to see these guys target BJJ as their next investigation!
Quote:
FRAUD - To deceive others in the promotion of something known to be false or unproven, for gain.
Apparently amending martial arts is bad but amending definitions of words is fine. Fraud is the deliberate deception of individuals or groups for profit. It has to be deliberate and it has to be deception.
The issue I have here is that if this very loose definition is accepted and the previous loose definition of fake martial arts is also accepted, it essentially means that any new martial art is fraudulent, and that is quite frankly a very foolish claim to make.
Quote:
*****[[ FRAUD IN MARTIAL ARTS ]]*****
Unfortunately FRAUD exists in martial arts in every corner of the globe!
The main objective of this page is to raise awareness in those without a fair understanding and a vulnerability to the deceit of fraudsters in the world of martial arts. This group is NOT a crusade against non-traditionalist.
And yet that's very much what the definitions about would imply...
Quote:
TYPES OF FRAUD IN MARTIAL ARTS.
1. False Ranks/Titles
2. False styles/systems
and often a combination of both.
There are many pseudo-masters in the martial arts world and many back up their claims using bogus science. They put their egos, recognition, greed and money before honesty, patience, discipline and selfless devotion. In some of these cases these teachers genuinely believe in what they are doing because of a shortcoming in their own development and understanding of authentic/traditional martial arts. So learn to detect illegitimate organizations and pseudo-masters and their false claims so you do not fall prey to them!
Agreed. I disagree with their selection methodology, however.
Quote:
Some argue that each so-called martial art is just a different way of achieving the same purpose, that no one martial art is inherently bad, and that each martial art should be respected. This politically correct statement supposedly tells us to respect all martial arts. Actually, this statement is a way for fraudulent martial artists to justify their existence. In effect, they are saying, Since I respect your art, you should respect my art, and, if you do not, then you are wrong. This makes them sound noble and makes you seem inconsiderate for not respecting their arts. Their reasoning is, since I do not criticize your (legitimate) art, you are wrong in criticizing my (illegitimate) art.
Agree here too. Not all arts are worthwhile, much as not all opinions are worthwhile.
Quote:
Frauds use this type of false logic all the time. Instead of providing evidence of how they are right, they criticize anyone who provides evidence of how they are wrong. Likewise, there are those who claim it is close-minded for not accepting the foolishness put out by so many so-called masters of the martial arts.
An old Zen parable says, "The finger that points to the moon is not the moon." Meaning that the one who points to the truth does not necessarily speak the truth. So, one who teaches a so-called martial art with elaborate demonstrations and words of 'wisdom' is not necessarily a legitimate martial artist. Do not mistake the finger for the moon.
I genuinely fail to see how this analogy is relevant at all when discussing frauds. The metaphor is designed to point out that the journey and the destination are not the same and that focusing on the wrong aspect of training can lead you to the wrong conclusion as to what the end result is supposed to be. This has next to no bearing on what is being discussed, and sounds more like someone trying to gain legitimacy by referencing something they haven't understood properly.
Quote:
Martial arts can be similar to religion in that it relies on believers... but look at the examples of extremist Christianity or Islam. Just because a person sincerely believes his or her religious belief is right, it does not necessarily make their teachings right. Just the same; if some pseudo-masters sincerely believe his or her martial art is legitimate, it does not mean it is a legitimate martial art. Do not confuse belief with fact!
Good conclusion.
Quote:
Every student supports his or her master and most believe everything the master tells them about his or her martial art and the martial arts in general. Most students do not question the credentials of the master. If you know that your master's doctorate, degree or professor and soke status were self ordained or obtained from some bogus organizations and you are pleased with the master and the instruction you are receiving and do not care about the master's credential, then that is fine. That is your choice. You have all the facts and you made your decision based upon them. However, if you are unaware of the bogus credentials or that the master is teaching you using unsubstantiated techniques and unproven theories, then you are being ripped off and also put in harm's way.
It's very much worth checking the background of your instructor to see what he has done before you start learning from him. Can't disagree here.
Quote:
Some nick names for pseudo-masters and styles:
Bruce Lie
Soke-mon
Jackie Sham
Scamurai
Ju-joka
SPAM (Someone Posing as A Master)
O-Senseless
Charla-dan
Take-your-dough
Partial arts
Mc Dojos
Black Belt Mills
Largely irrelevant, I have no idea why this list was deemed to be appropriate in the middle of this mission statement.
Quote:
The Japanese term "Soke" correctly refers to a person who has inherited, and is often named by their predecessor, as the successor of a specific style of martial arts.
However for pseudo-masters these days, becoming a soke is as simple as calling yourself one or sending a membership fee to one of the many illegitimate organizations out there! Illegitimate martial art organizations are almost as plentiful as pseudo-masters. Many of the illegitimate organizations have been started by pseudo-masters themselves but some have even been started by legitimate masters who are trying to take money from the gullible public.
Fair enough, this is a red flag that should put people on their toes, but there are a number of others out there. Soke was one of the most prevalent, but now there are a lot more which are becoming more and more common, so only including one warning sign is a little pointless.
Quote:
Many pseudo-masters are charlatans who deliberately exploit their students. The students then become unwitting victims who share their misinformation and personal experiences with others. New students of martial arts styles are usually referred by friends, relatives, and neighbours who are already students and so the circle of ignorance goes on.
Again, I don't necessarily disagree with this, but it seems very disjointed from the rest of the text. If anything, the closeness of martial arts to cults should be dealt with in much more depth, with a lot more warning signs as to how to tell the difference between genuine traditional training and a cult based on those traditional trappings. If anything, this is actually a mark against seemingly-traditional systems, as ones where you treat your instructor as an equal are much less likely to lead to the imbalance of power that makes cults possible.
Quote:
"Quackery" derives from the word quacksalver (someone who boasts about his salves). Dictionaries define quack as "a charlatan" and "one who talks pretentiously without sound knowledge of the subject discussed." There are many illegitimate organizations and pseudo-masters around that fall under the definition of quack.
Pointless definition, really not sure why this pseudo-academic history lesson is in this article.
Quote:
Iligitimate martial art masters and organizations sell books, videos, and home study courses that they say will permit you to learn and perfect all their special techniques. Apparently, they think a person may learn their art from a book, video, or home study course. However, when someone criticizes the masters or organizations, their defense is that you have to meet them in person or experience one of their classes in person before you may know enough about them to criticize them. Well! Which is it? If I may pay you and learn your art from a book, video, or home study course without ever seeing you or taking one of your live classes, then why is it that can I not criticize you for what information I may find in these products?
I fully agree that video and online learning is more or less a complete waste of time. However, this rant seems to be referring to a very specific case that the author may have experienced in the past, while generalising it to all illegitimate martial artists, which I suspect was unintentional.
Quote:
Unproven methods or techniques are not necessarily wrong. Although proven, methods or techniques that are consistent with established scientific concepts may be considered experimental. However, legitimate martial artists do not promote unproven procedures in the marketplace.
The issue here is with the definitions above regarding unproven. Unproven appears to mean "non-traditional" under the original definitions, though some weight appears to be placed on competition (though such individuals from modern styles would not be allowed to call themselves martial artists under this group's definition, of course).
Quote:
The number of illegitimate organizations and pseudo-masters increases each year. They are not just a nuisance, they take money from unsuspecting students, they teach techniques that may get the students injured or killed in a self-defense situation, and they advocate illegal responses to self-defense situations.
Here's the point where I have a real problem with this group. This is a really good reason to go after genuinely fraudulent or over-ranked individuals making stuff up. However, reading through the article about my old organisation, NO reference is made to the actual efficacy of the techniques taught, the legal information that is taught as part of the supplementary learning (i.e. the concept of a proportionate response under law) or the fact that the organisation has no paid instructors and therefore only charges students enough to cover venue costs and insurance.
Quote:
True masters earned their status through legitimate means and they have no respect for illegitimate organizations or pseudo-masters, no matter how much good they appear to be doing for the martial arts. Just because a fraud does some good does not make him or her less a fraud. Take the mafia dons for example. They are loved by the people in their neighborhoods for their generosity. The neighbors do not know, have forgotten, or do not care that the dons got their power and wealth by illegal means; they only care what the dons are doing for them.
First half of the paragraph is valid, second half is pointless analogy.
Quote:
Admittedly, back in the day an 18yr old could have a 4th dan in kodokan judo, but it was still a system in which one had to study, learn and truly prove technical proficiency before being rewarded by a board of his seniors in a traditional martial art.
I'm unsure of my judo history, but I certainly can't recall meeting any 4th dan 18 year olds. Maybe standards have improved since the old days.
Quote:
SO,
When a master or instructor starts talking as if he or she was from another world, beware! Check out your organization, master, school, and instructors before you get too attached. There are no recently discovered secret techniques, only variations to age-old techniques that have been added by some so-called masters in attempts to justify their own, and their arts', existence.
More or less. There are newer strategies for using the older techniques which ahve proved to be very effective in modern days. There are also new techniques for dealing with weapons that didn't exist when traditional martial arts were being gradually developed.
Quote:
Any western style ending in Do, Jutsu, Ryu, 'karate' or 'kempo' is simply a copy-cat of a traditional asian art and is arguably cultural theft.
I think this is one of the most idiotic comments in the entire article. If I learn two styles of japanese martial arts to high levels and choose to synthesise them into a single system, why would it be cultural theft to name the system in a way that acknowledges the culture that supplied the original techniques to me via whatever circuitous route they followed.
By this definition, once you get a certain unique flair in another country for an art, it shouldn't retain the original name. Judo as taught around the world can be very different due to the different physiologies of various populations around the world. The way the Japanese do judo and karate is rather different to the way people in Russia, the UK and the USA train those arts, and this should "arguably" be considered enough of a distinction to make the use of the original name "cultural theft".
In any case, a lot of the time an organisation develops a new identity by accident. It might be that a club is given a specific name when it first comes to a new location, then that location expands, forms a group and the group eventually becomes a style in and of itself. "Shotokan" karate would be a great example of this happening.
Quote:
Regardless if they put "Norwegian" or "Somolian" or "Brazillian" in front of it. Even a widely respected modern sporting system like Brazillian Jujitsu is a variation/rebranding of an asian theme, such as old Kodokan Judo, Kito-Ryu Juijutsu or Tenjin Shinyo Ryu Juijutsu.
As indicated above, I'd love to see the (anonymous) authors in this group taking on Brazillian Jiu Jitsu and calling them frauds and cultural thieves. Really, I'd love that.
Quote:
Examples of truly traditional non-asian martial arts/sports are;
1. Savate
2. Kampfringen
3. Capoiera
4. Krav Maga
5. Nubian Wrestling
6. Boxing
7. Dambe Boxing
8. Greco Roman Wresting
9. Calinda/Kalinda(Trinidadian stick fighting)
I believe Greco-Roman Wrestling is actually a modern reinterpretation of an ancient system. By all the above definitions, this is a non-traditional art developed by cultural thieves.
Quote:
and now you know..
JOIN THE CAUSE, SPREAD THE WORD!!
People here will likely know that I trained with the Jitsu Foundation for quite a long time. This is an art that was founded in the UK by a Yorkshireman named Brian Graham, among whose teachers was a man called Matthew Komp. Before that, the history of the association is largely a mystery, as Brian was known for embellishing the trust somewhat when the mood took him.
Matthew Komp has apparently received a 10th dan from someone this group doesn't like, which apparently by association means that the entire Jitsu Foundation is a) not a martial art (especially not jujutsu) and b) fraudulent. What they have utterly ignored are a few of the more salient facts, including:
Komp was a member of the WJJF and reached 8th dan with them. While they may not necessarily have the best reputation, they certainly don't hand out such high grades easily. Komp received his 8th dan in 1987 and his 10th dan in 2010, which is not an unreasonable level of progression. I have never met Matthew Komp or seen him train, however dismissing a style because he was involved peripherally as a founder seems over the top
Brian Graham founded the National Samurai Jiu Jitsu Association. Very cheesy name, and one I'd probably take exception to these days, but that name was for marketing purposes and it worked quite well. However, Graham was not the driving force behind the expansion of the association, as that would fall into Peter Farrar's hands. Farrar was one of Graham's senior students at the time, and under his direction the style shifted dramatically in focus away from Graham's original style and into something which looked rather different. In time, the Jitsu Foundation became the new name for the association, and a board of senior instructors was formed to oversee the development of the art.
During the expansion, many instructors were promoted who had previously trained in other systems. As such, techniques adapted even further to blend them with other knowledge coming in from various sources depending on what people had trained in. Even now it's possible to identify distinct methods of doing certain techniques which derived from different named individuals at some point in the style's past
In short, the fact that Komp was one of Graham's instructors is almost entirely irrelevant because the style isn't even Graham's any more, let alone what Komp learned.
The association makes no claim to be traditional, though I will admit this is something that needs work for individual clubs. The only excuse I can give here is that a lot of the history of the style is hearsay because of the confusion regarding Graham's training history and Komp's history before that. Certain half-truths and misinterpretations became common "wisdom" over the years, and unfortunately such stories have a habit of becoming accepted as truth by those who put together the websites (mostly university students who have had little exposure to the history of the style and most instructors simply don't care about it). This is an issue that likely needs to be addressed in an ongoing fashion, however it is not fraud, just misguided.
At no point has any of the actual training methodology been discussed in their incredibly negative review of this style. Nor have the testing requirements to achieve instructor grade in the style. Apparently such issues are not important to the authors as long as the art they train in is "traditional".
Anyway, I've probably ranted enough here, but I'd like to summarise.
It's good to teach people to be sceptical of instructor claims. Really, I can't agree with this more. However, if you're judging an art solely on connections to traditional schools without reference to what they have done since, you are entirely missing the point when it comes to the development of martial arts over time. As long as the change is for a good reason, change is not bad and it certainly doesn't stop a system from being a martial art.
References:
Fraud In Martial Arts Awareness Society
Their Review of the Jitsu Foundation (also saved in full for future reference in case they backtrack at some point in future)