New editorial - Western Civ & Spartans

[david welch]

Do you have to use such rampant ethnocentrism?

Can't you just enjoy other cultures without having to tear the west down?

[Gene Tausk]

I knew this essay was going to raise debates. No surprise it raises raging debates.

Groundrules:

1. This is a forum for martial arts discussion. Limit your comments on John's editorial to this.

2. Are you talking about events that occurred after 1700? Then you are off-topic and your post will be deleted.

3. Ad hominem attacks will not be tolerated by anyone.

Have fun.

[John_Clements]

Your generalizations are way off target, your own "historical" facts are a mish-mash of context-less half truths, and they don't speak to the piece's theme at all, that being the "Western civilization" under which our martial arts existed and do so once again. This is yet more proof that they just don't teach the Humanities at universities anymore. Fortunately, I have far greater scholars and historians on my side educating me in these matters.

And I will add, our Renaissance ancestors certainly did not think of Turkey as being part of "their" civilization, let alone experiencing a "Renaissance." As I recall...they did a lot of their fighting specifically against the threat of the Turks.

Whether the Spartans owned slaves in no way disparages their accomplishment or their motives in defending either their own or their fellow city states.

I suggest you go start a website dedicated to practicing your own martial arts, if you can find any, and then write your own editorial on what it means to have Turkish values. Good luck with that.

JC

[Stewart Sackett]

Do you have to use such rampant ethnocentrism?

Can't you just enjoy other cultures without having to tear the west down?

This post seems odd to me, as it’s my impression that Mr. Loutfi’s reaction to this editorial stems from the fact that it (the editorial) continually refers to the West in relation to other cultural traditions. I, therefore, find it odd that you would admonish him to look at other cultures without any comparison to the West. It’s not that that’s a bad idea…it’s just that, as suggestions go, it does seem to be a 2-edged sword:

If Mr. Clements had presented a summery of the general philosophical positions/methods common to Western civilization & a list of noteworthy western achievements, without comparative statements regarding the West’s inherent value in relation to other civilizations; then the article would be unlikely to be found offensive (although it may be that such presentation would render the prose somewhat bloodless).

[John_Clements]

Yes, you are probably right, Stewart. But you know, it's often by contrasting ourselves that we better define ourselves. Sometimes you just have to say, "this is what I'm not" so that you can then say what you are. And sometimes you also have to say, "hey, I'm different, I'm special in ways and here's why."

I'm not the least insulted if someone following, say, Confucian values and Chinese culture tells me how and why they are different or believe they are better in some way. That's their prerogative. I know what my own culture's values are and what its heritage means to me, so how could I be offended? Make sense?

JC

[J Marwood]

I must say I am frankly disappointed by your conduct here Mr Clements, and that of some of your supporters.

I have enjoyed a number of discussions with ARMA members on other boards and found them to be well-informed and interested in discussion. To see a lack of open discussion on this board, championed by the head of ARMA does them, and the wider WMA community a disservice.

Whilst I could respond to the errors in your article for the same reasons as Ms Boyden above, I would prefer to urge you to reconsider your actions in defending your article. Banning those who disagree with you, deleting their posts and hiding behind unjustified claims of ad hominem attacks gives the unfortunate impression of intellectual dishonesty.

Whilst I am aware you have your critics in the WMA world, many of those whose opinions I respect have spoken of you as an honourable, honest man. A man with firmly held views and the willingness to stand up for these views in reasoned debate. What I have seen here sadly does not support those claims.

I would therefore urge you, Mr Clements, to engage with those who have criticised your article and take part in a rigorous academic discussion. If you choose to continue to use bans and personal attacks to avoid debate then I fear you run the risk of losing the respect you have earned through your previous work.

Should you wish to have this discussion in a less heated or less public fora then please feel free to email me via the profile link below.

[John_Clements]

Sorry, but we have a little thing called an "editorial" and "free speech" in our country. If you disagree, go write your own editorial and make your own generalizations. I’m under no obligation to appease your opinion on what Western Civilization means. I make no apology for pride in the achievements and values of my culture and heritage. If it makes you feel differently that's your issue and perhaps you shouldn't be on a website devoted to celebrating it.

And accusing someone of ad hominen attacks when there are no such attacks present is itself an ad hominen, as well as hypocrisy.

[Andrew Jackson]

Yes, you are probably right, Stewart. But you know, it's often by contrasting ourselves that we better define ourselves. Sometimes you just have to say, "this is what I'm not" so that you can then say what you are. And sometimes you also have to say, "hey, I'm different, I'm special in ways and here's why."

I'm not the least insulted if someone following, say, Confucian values and Chinese culture tells me how and why they are different or believe they are better in some way. That's their prerogative. I know what my own culture's values are and what its heritage means to me, so how could I be offended?

Well said. I think this is an attitude which needs to be far more common.

However, I do think that part is not so well said, and in fact is the reason I have just registered to post. Although you obviously have strong and (in my view) laudable pride in your culture's heritage, your understanding of Western cultural achievements seems to be seriously flawed. Alina Boyden set out many of the misunderstandings in your article, and I really think you should be rather more willing to accept what she says rather than dismissing it.

Your article doesn't merely say "this is what Western Culture has achieved, you'll notice that other cultures didn't do those things", it credits the West with many achievements which were actually the fruit of other cultures, and appears to suggest that there is nothing good in other cultures (this is more by omission, which I think is acceptable, but the suggestion is expleicit in more than one place). It is therefore lauding an incorrect, misleading and almost dishonest view of Western culture.

This seriously weakens its force, and greatly dimishes its value in spreading an attitude of pride in Western heritage. By saying much that is false, you obscure the truth. That is, I think, a great shame.

A more balanced basis for the argument would be of infinitely more value, in my opinion.

To take a parallel: I am part of an English campaign (a strong word for a fairly loose movement) to rebuild pride in England, which has been seriously dented over the last 50-100 years or so. Now England has been part of some great things: the British Empire, for example, would not have happened without England. But I would not countenance suggesting that all the achievements of the Empire stemmed from England (in the way that some Scots seem to suggest that Scotland did all the work...), nor would I turn a blind eye to the various errors made and problems caused by the Empire.

[J Marwood]

Sorry, but we have a little thing called an "editorial" and "free speech" in our country. If you disagree, go write your own editorial. I make no apology for pride in the achievements and values of my culture and heritage. If it makes you feel differently that's your issue and perhaps you shouldn't be on a website devoted to celebrating it.

I 100% support your right to free speech, yet you must recognise that having free speech means others are free to disgree with you. Of course this is your forum, and you have the right to set the rules here. However the way you do that reflects upon you and I hope that you allow this forum to live up to it's title of 'Research and Discussion Forums'

I had also hoped that you would have the academic integrity to discuss the points where it has been claimed your article is incorrect. It is by this method of rational debate and objective discussion that a deeper understanding is reached. Indeed that is part of the academic tradition we could argue has come to us from ancient Greece!

I would very much like to see you to respond fully to the points raised in Ms Boyden's post above, rather than the brief and rather brusque reply you gave.

[Mike Cartier]

What I claimed was that this article is filled with unfounded generalizations that have no basis in historical fact, and I think I have shown that fairly clearly

you have shown nothing of the sort to me, i see you grasping desperately at isolated facts to somehow make your own generalization about Western culture being no different or in fact inferior to others.

I also see no one restricting free speech, there are rules on this forum, those who follow the rules do not get banned or deleted.

I don't know why people have to get so pissy if you simply try express some appreciation of what our ancestors did. Why is that such a horrible thing?

[Andrew Jackson]

you have shopwne nothing of the sort to me, i see you grapsing desperatly at isolated facts to somehow make your own generalization about Western culture being no different or in fact inferior to others.

The comment wasn't denigrating the West, or saying it was no different, it appeared to me that it was simply trying to give credit where it is due.

I don't know why people have to get so pissy if you simply try express some apprecioation of what our ancestors did. Why is that such a horrible thing?

The "horrible thing" is to claim that group A are better than group B because they did something laudable, when in fact it was group C (or even group B) that did it.

For example: "The Isle of Wight is a great place, as evidenced by Stonehenge".

[Nigel Plum]

I think there are two main problems with trying to define western culture & assessing it's impact on historical fighting arts. Firstly defining "Western" The culture of Europe is hardly homogenous, if we start adding parts of the new world which ones do we add?
North America? Central & South America? South Africa? Austrailia? There are arguments both for and against all of these. Then there are the states on the borders of Europe. Both Turkey & Russia for example are very different culturally from somewhere like Belgium or Portugal, but are nevertheless geographically part of Europe. I've even heard Israel described as culturally bound to the west despite quite clearly being outside of Europe. Finding an underlying cultral identity for all of these is going to be difficult & everyone is likely to come up with a different answer.

The second problem is in relating modern western / US culture to the medieval period. Cultural values aren't static, I don't believe in all the same things as my grandparents did. As a C21st Englishman I would find little in the way of shared values with my C15th counterpart.

As has been pointed out many of the things we cherish as our cultural heritage, freedom of consience, democracy, cricket or learning martial arts purely for recreation were not part of the culture during the period we study. Given that, the usefulness of using our cultural values as a point of referance when interpreting historical martial arts is dubious at best & may lead us down the wrong path.

[Martin Wallgren]

I don't know why people have to get so pissy if you simply try express some apprecioation of what our ancestors did. Why is that such a horrible thing?

The "horrible thing" is to claim that group A are better than group B because they did something laudable, when in fact it was group C (or even group B) that did it.

For example: "The Isle of Wight is a great place, as evidenced by Stonehenge".

Got to back Andrew up here! One should be very careful with stating things as facts when they are hard to prove. Everithing form history is hard to prove. Some people don´t agree what happened 5 years ago. Or even last weekend (many buddys of mine). So stating that this or that was achived my them or those is dangerous.

To the defence of JC I will say that he has his right of oppinion and I don´t agree with it but I´ll defend his right to have it. Everyone must though be prepeaired to take critic on what they say! I am.

Just as long as we ar civil about it we should be able to discuss almost anything. Don´t you think?

[John_Clements]

As I wrote, historical role-play reenactment efforts quite often result in creating a certain bubble that encircles and strives to isolate a period or era out of the lager story of Western civilization as if to imagine it somehow existed complete on its own, rather than aspects of it having been absorbed, surpassed, or extinguished over generations. (The arguable lack of emphasis on the Western Humanities within higher education nowadays only aggravates this, I'm quite sure). There is the need then to draw, as it were, a “larger circle” around things by making some generalizations about just what elements define the civilization of the “West.”

The issue being missed here is that our martial arts were never practice in a cultural or moral vacuum. We cannot ignore this fact. Asian martial arts typically don't and I expect no less for ours.

If my editorial commemorating the 300 Spartans and linking their actions to a larger Western tradition to consider gives some neded perspective, then all the better.

Those who are sniping at it need to reread it more carefully and less emotionally because their criticisms are off target, insubstantial, and largely out of context.

JC

[Nigel Plum]

As I wrote, historical role-play reenactment efforts quite often result in creating a certain bubble that encircles and strives to isolate a period or era out of the lager story of Western civilization as if to imagine it somehow existed complete on its own, rather than aspects of it having been absorbed, surpassed, or extinguished over generations. The arguable lack of emphasis on the Western Humanities within higher education nowadays only aggravates this. There is the need then to draw, as it were, a “larger circle” around things by making some generalizations about just what elements define the civilization of the “West.”

The issue being missed here is that martial arts were never practice in a cultural or moral vacuum. We cannot ignore this fact. Asian martial arts typically don't and I expect no less for ours.

If my editorial commemorating the 300 Spartans and linking their actions to a larger tradition to consider in perspective, then all the better.

JC

While I agree in an ideal world we would be able to fully take into account the cultural background of the material we study, we can't. We aren't them, our bodies are different & they are as alien to a guy from London or Miami as someone from Beijing, Mumbai or the Gaza strip. Further in fact as we can't get on a plane & visit them. Trying to understand their culture from records is about as effective as reading a tourist guide to France but not actually going there.