It has been a while since my last article and I do apologise, but the sequel is finally here.
In this installment, we will examine some practical steps the student of combat can take to avoid the slippery slope into sociopathy, or 'aggressive psychopathy'[1], starting with acquiring a firm ethical grounding.
[You will also note that I have broken this sequel into multiple parts. Much as I would like to keep it brief, killology is a subject that demands treatment in detail, so for the next four weeks, I will be writing an additional weekly chapter on this topic.]
Resolve Your Ethical Issues
This may seem obvious, but the overwhelming majority of self-defence, combative and other purported 'real-world' martial arts studies gloss over - if not completely ignore - this incredibly important question.
Why are you fighting? And, by extension, for whom or what?
Many people, whether or not they admit it to themselves, walk into a martial arts class wanting to learn how to become invincible Hollywood arsekickers at some level (I certainly did when I first took up the martial arts). What they don't realise is that fighting isn't the way Hollywood portrays it - a glorified schoolyard brawl against the ultimate school bully, at the end of which the winner gets accolades and the girl and then the end credits roll. Fighting, depending on where and why you do it, is either a sport and should be treated with all due respect and diligence as one, or else a deadly serious affair that begins long before the first blow is struck and continues long after the survivor flees the scene.
In 'On Killing', Boyd writes of the use of moral distance from the enemy as a means of legitimising killing in combat soldiers. Simply, the fighter's cause is made to seem just and the enemy are universally painted as criminals, judged and proven guilty at the start of the conflict. In this way, what may have originally begun as a morally ambiguous struggle over the sundry things nation-states fight over becomes a righteous crusade against injustice, and any violence done to the enemy just punishment for crimes committed.
At the level of individual self-defence, of course, I am not in any way, shape or form advocating that anyone mimic this process with self-propaganda. Instead, what I am suggesting is that the aspiring student of combat use the following steps as a guide to developing a personal code to frame and rationalise violent actions one may have to undertake in the course of one's own life. Absolution - from self or others - is an important part of the rationalisation process that follows acts of violence, and when this process fails, psychological trauma follows.
Step 1.) Determine What it is You Fight For
The first and most important question. Do you live in a bad neighbourhood and have to fight to defend yourself, your friends and loved ones against unprovoked aggression? Are you a professional who has to throw himself/herself in the face of human aggression - military, law enforcement - on a regular basis to defend others? Or are you still lingering in Hollywood delusions and ready to take a swing at anyone who looks at your beer funny?
I make no (overt) moral judgements here, but whatever your cause, have a good, long and honest think about it and decide what your primary motivation to fight, when fight you must, is.
Step 2.) When is Avoidance Impossible?
As I always teach my students, the best fight is the one you didn't have. Sun Zi likewise wrote that a strategist of the highest order wins battles without fighting. Have you done everything in your power to avoid violent conflict? Did you take a detour around the bad street to go home by brightly lit, crowded areas? Did you attempt to redirect your attacker's aggression with verbal de-escalation and distractions like your decoy wallet (you do have one, don't you?)? Did you tell your family to run back to the bright, crowded street as fast as their legs could carry them? Did you apologise for knocking Pugnacious MacThugly's beer over and offer to buy him another (while keeping your fence up, of course)? By the way, why were you drinking in the same pub as him?
I could go on and on with illustrative examples, but you get the idea by now - rangers are taught to 'box' or detour around enemies they have not been instructed to engage. Keep your eyes and ears open for avoidable trouble and do likewise with it.
Note also that posturing and blustering to scare the bad guys into backing down is a valid tactic, and the oldest trick in the animal kingdom. Just be sure to use it judiciously, study it well and have something to back it up when it fails.
Step 3.) Recognise the Triggers
Funakoshi once stated , "There is no first attack in karate-do." Some karate instructors have interpreted this to a regrettable degree of literalness, declaring a complete moratorium on striking first for whatever reason on moral grounds. Despite their good intentions, however, idealised morality must always bow to the reality of the art of war, that being that the party that lands the first effective attack generally comes out on top in any encounter. Modern armies spend vast sums of money and training and planning time to achieve just that in a real conflict, and so should any student of combat that intends to survive an actual encounter.
The crux, then, is learning to recognise 'triggers' - cues that an encounter has already progressed past the stage of de-escalation. In your typical faceoff, the party preparing for physical aggression will typically evince signs that include head-bobbing, deterioration of speech to repetitive single syllables, stalking (side-to-side or circular walking focused on the object of aggression), forceful arm-waving and other gestures in an attempt to look larger and more intimidating.
Most importantly, however, they will be mostly likely be moving towards you.
I cannot emphasise that last point enough. If someone is moving towards you while displaying aggression, they mean business. If you do not clean their clock while you still have a chance, your blood be on your own head, and quite probably the blood of anyone you might be protecting as well.
If nothing else, someone running at you full-tilt brandishing a machete should be a pretty important clue that they mean you grievous bodily harm. It isn't always this obvious, though. Yes, I do have a sense of humour.
On the other hand, if someone is displaying aggression while moving away, they are attempting their own avoidance and shouldn't be a threat. Even so, this would be a good time for you to practice some avoidance of your own, as your dance partner may get a serious case of sore loser's guilt and return shortly with a mob and/or weapons for a rematch.
4.) How Far are you Willing to Go?
So now that blows are being exchanged and you are navigating the swirling currents of violence, seeking the safety of the opposite shore, how far are you prepared to go? How much damage are you willing to do to your assailant(s)? How much damage are you yourself prepared to endure to defend whatever it is you are defending? What tactics are you willing to use in the process? Are you prepared to endure the consequences that may follow - prosecution and revenge attacks on yourself and your friends and loved ones being the foremost amongst them?
Conclusion
Note that none of the above offer easy answers. The purpose of this article is to encourage the student of combat to ask hard questions now, when at training in time of (relative) peace so they don't come to haunt him or her during the times in which his or her skills should be given free rein from doubt and fear.
Until our next installment, train smart, train hard.
References and Bibliography
1. Grossman, Dave: On Killing - The Psychological Cost of Learning to Kill in War and Society
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment