View Single Post
Old 07-26-2010, 11:30 AM   #36
Ketsan
Dojo: Zanshin Kai
Location: Birmingham
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 865
United Kingdom
Offline
Re: Aikido: more than a martial art?

Quote:
Niall Matthews wrote: View Post
Well I was about to say this discussion was about aikido, not aikijujutsu, but Graham's soy sauce comment says it better.

An art that has as its aim harmony and that protects the attacker wouldn't be any use for war really. So the sooner politicians and generals learn the principles of aikido the better. Because humans shouldn't have any use for war either.

It's an interesting concept - aikido as a tool of international diplomacy.
Aikido really badly fails to protect the attacker. Judo protects the attacker much better; no Judoka has to jump over their own wrist to protect their joints. No Judoka can execute a technique while smashing someone in the face with their elbow. Judo has been refined to remove all the nasty techniques.

Break someones arm or leg in competition and that technique will quickly be banned in competition and practiced less as a result. Judo has evolved under selective pressures that make it very nice on the attacker.

There's nothing like that in Aikido. Two thirds of our techniques are joint breaking techniques by my reckoning.

So has Aikido been shaped by a desire to protect the attacker? No not really. There may have been an intention to do so but it never worked out that way. Again as I've said before, what are we actually doing on the mat? Well we're punching each other in the face followed by jerking one anothers joints with as much as our body and as much power as we can.

That's Aikido. Whatever the intentions of the founder, that's what was passed on. What this thread is really about is "What was Aikido intended to be and is that what we're doing?"
  Reply With Quote