There is a saying that in every issue, there is the public reason, the private reason and then there is the real reason. The issue is the many groups and why they aren't united - the real reason is that they aren't separated because of style or lineage. They are separated because of jurisdiction. Usually, all divisions are over jurisdiction or what is commonly called authority. The real question is that of protecting your own jurisdiction in order to protect your internal cohesion and viability as a group. The removal of all boundaries is a surrender of jurisdiction. The surrender of jurisdcition means that the money can go anywhere, the protection of jurisdiction is the attempt to protect the finances. All you have to do is to follow the money. I'm not suggesting this is wrong. It is the way of all humans. Groups leave the Aikikai so not to have to be accountable to their authority. In leaving, they take the money with them. If the Aikikai (which is the organization of the Founder's family) wants to protect certain ideals that they feel are essential to Aikido, they must protect their authority to enforce their ideals within their own jurisdiction. Those who leave are not accountable to the Founder's family and can do whatever they want. Some who leave make significant deviations and some don't but despite that, the issue is who will have the authority to say who does what. It is only natural that the mother organization would want to keep a say so in how the art is generally disseminated. Anyone who wants to leave is free to go. Some who go do a great job of maintaining the Founder's legacy but even so, they now control their own money. This now becomes a competition in the open market place over the funds. Again, this may not appease the idealistic but there won't be much of an Aikikai if the group breaks up into 1000 equal factions. The money will also be divided that way. The one that can control the greater portion of the money will have the greater influence and thus control it's own future better.

It is only natural that this kind of competition would ensue in the open market place. It is the way of the world. The issues aren't the same for the big groups and the little groups. The little groups want more freedom and they are inhibited by the rules made by the larger group which cannot respond to their needs so often they depart. In the larger group, the public can be assured of certain things. In the smaller independent groups, you can never know what you are getting.

Don't ever expect the larger groups to surrender jurisdiction for an idealistic idea of everyone holding hands over fences singing kumbaya. That will never happen. The larger group will discourage small split offs because this chipping away will eventually mean the end of it's organizational life. The smaller groups may want to leave in order to better serve themselves and to have more freedom and to control their own funds. Member dues, test fees and the right to generate and keep income are the hallmarks of the smaller groups. In both large and small, ego plays a part and there are good things and bad on both sides but the struggle will always continue.

As I said, this is all happening because it's normal in organizational and human relations. There are good and well intentioned people on both sides of the issue. It's an easy out to demonize the other side but the truth is that there are both good and bad examples of everything I have said. The Aikikai was first, then all other divisions follow for whatever reason. They won't support those divisions which weaken them. I think though that all should be charitable and do what they can for themselves and let the people in the open market place decide how things all work out.
Best wishes,
Jorge