spacewastrel: my fursuit head (Default)

spacewastrel: my fursuit head (Default)
A friend asked me for help learning martial arts, so I created 8 classes with 10 moves each that I shared with her over the past year, and which I am now sharing with you, because why not?

 

“Do you have any tips on how I can, like, self-teach martial arts at all? Cos like I want to do more fitnessy martial arts stuff, but don't have money for official lessons/classes etc. So just curious your thoughts/ tips if you have any? I've done yoga (not a martial art technically I know but still) and capoeira mostly but I want to get into aikido, silat and taichi and like maybe learn to fight with a bo staff but like yeah.”

 

I would absolutely love to try to help you with that if you'll let me! Thank you for asking me

 

Do you have a trick knee? Are you comfortable kneeling then standing up from a kneel a lot? Silat has a lot of kneeling, that's why I'm asking ^^

 

I mean you can work around it but it helps if you don't have to

 

I'm trying to put together a short list of short sequences I can send you and show you

 

Good to know! How much martial arts have you done btw? What basic punches and kicks would you say you already know how to do? 🙂 I hope I'm not asking too many questions! This is supposed to be a bit of a back and forth process ^^

 

Do you know how to block or parry or just the esquiva?

 

There's no wrong answer

 

Bençao (Blessing) ^^

 

Other martial arts call that a "push kick" like the Muay Thai "teep"

 

It's different from a karate or Kung fu front snap kick

 

Because the aim isn't to cause pain from impact but to move your opponent away to control the range of the fight

 

Fighting's not just about power, it's about range, speed, leverage, focus, and direction

 

There are five basic lines of attack: right, left, up, down, and through. They each have their own punches, kicks, and defences, but they're all based around the same principle based on direction

 

So a lot of them are interchangeable if you know what you're doing and think fast

 

You only need to know a very small amount of moves if you can use them well

 

Every time you strike first you should be taking them by surprise. Every time they strike first should be because you're letting them make a mistake so you can capitalize on it

 

The weakest targets are the shins, crotch, throat, and eyes. Target them first, without hesitation

 

Stop me if I'm going too fast 🙂

 

I'm assuming you want a combination of good exercise, good self-defence, and something fun that looks cool

 

The best sequences are 3 to 5 moves long. They have to be long enough to actually destabilize your opponent but short enough to place and memorize

 

They have to have a "flow" - that's very important. Some moves naturally follow other moves and some moves don't

 

Like how some letters don't go after some other letters

 

For example try a left hook then a right uppercut. It flows because your right side is already gathering momentum for it during the hook. Try a left hook then a right jab. Immediately you're fighting against yourself. You have to go right across your left arm. It doesn't "flow."

 

A backhand follows a hook from the same hand well but a hook doesn't follow a backhand from the same hand well

 

That's because a hook *gathers* momentum but a backhand *uses* momentum

 

You develop a "feel" for it with practice

 

You want momentum on your side

 

That's why combos are important

 

When you have a lot of experience with combos you'll be able to visualize how performing them feels by looking at them

 

so the turns, do they have a special martial arts term or is it jsut turn or spin?

 

It depends on the style, in capoeira they're called "giro" for example ("hee-roh")

 

This first one is Pagar Nusa Silat

1) L backhand, R low round kick, R reverse elbow, R backhand, L low round kick

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/BNG7Uj1eUDA

 

This one is Muay Thai
2) L elbow, R knee, L punch, R elbow up, L knee

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/RHgLUagxwp4

This one is Dragon Tai Chi
3) L punch, R front kick, L backhand, R backhand, L front kick

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/pDx2fczZ8qg

This one is Indian Kalari
4) R backhand, L backhand, R front kick, L backhand, R hook

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/mq2gTCWsxoM

This one is Frog Tai Chi
5) R elbow, L elbow, R hook, L backhand

It's very unusual! There's also a toad style but it's distinct

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xzQp62LoQQ8

This is a Kung Fu combo called the Backfist Blitz
6) R front kick, L punch, R backhand, R elbow, L backhand

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/LmW9Q1kySkw

This is PCK Cimande Silat
7) R hook, L low front kick, R elbow, L elbow, R front kick

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ElXTi0zaFqs

This is Drunken Fist
8) R hook, R backhand, L backhand, R hook

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/9cTryTFGamY

This is Bando Bull, a sub-style from the jungles of Burma/Myanmar
9) R punch, L elbow up, R elbow, L knee, R elbow down

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/kkGn_xWyq0Y

This is a Silat style called Gajah Putih, or White Elephant
10) R punch, R knee, R reverse elbow, R backhand, L elbow

The arms are supposed to move like the tusks and trunk of an elephant with stomping footwork

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/CSg-VXtYFOo

 

(This is in the order they were sent in. I had to reverse the screen to film - these are the correct sides written here)

 

Any suggested warm ups before I do these?

 

I should make some stretching videos soon too! Not tonight if that's okay ^^ Good question to ask though!

 

Eeeeee This is so exciting

 

You want to throw in a good mix of: punch and kick, left and right, high and low, attack and defense. Too much or not enough varying in any of these will almost always hurt you. You want to keep them guessing, on their toes

 

So combos that include a lot of that range are good

 

Elephant is an animal I spiritually resonate with. I wonder if the animals I resonate with symbolically would be an easier 'style' of martial arts for me to learn 🤔

 

I often thought so! I try to never forget where moves come from in general. It makes them easier to remember when there's a story around them

 

I'm a Tamarian, Stories and symbols are how my brain works

 

That will serve you well here! A good sequence is like a little story about the hubris of Man. He thought he could escape you. You're about to teach him why he's wrong

 

Let's look at "hook, sweep, jump kick, ax kick." What a little story we have here. First you come in high, then when they're busy up there you go low - low tide, giant with feet of clay. You guide them to jump over the sweep like a jump rope, then they're caught in the air where a jump kick is harder to dodge. Finally if they duck under that they're in *exactly* the most vulnerable position to your ax kick coming down like a lightning bolt. Those four moves are like a hawk hunting a mouse. Cause and effect.

 

You paint them into a corner

 

You have to think about exactly what you want them not to think about, like with chess but really fast

 

I do know how to play chess

 

That will serve you well too 🙂

 

that sounds like feinting? kind of? which is fencing (another sport I want to learn )

 

There's a definite element of that!

 

I'm going to do a stretching video or two with some explanations, then maybe a clearer description of how each move is performed, then maybe ten more combos for after you're confident with the first ten if you're up for it? 🙂

 

You also mentioned staff fighting I think

 

I can show you some of that too if you'd like? ^^

 

11) L hook, R hook, L backhand, R hook. (scorpion)

12) R punch, R front kick, L punch, R punch, R front kick. (tiger)

13) L reverse elbow, R elbow, R reverse elbow, R elbow down, R knee. (seni gayong silat)

14) L uppercut, R uppercut, L backhand, R hook, R front kick. (kempo)

15) R backhand, L body blow, R elbow, R backhand, L reverse elbow. (viet vo dao)

16) R backhand, L hook, L backhand, R hook, R front kick. (crane)

17) R front kick, L front kick, R elbow up, L knee. (leopard)

18) R front kick, R punch, L front kick, L punch, R body blow. (hapkido)

19) R punch, L punch, L low round kick. (savate)

20) L punch, R elbow down, R crouch uppercut, R jump hook down. (makris silat)

I'm starting with 10 more combos after all!
I should be able to make videos for them soon too hopefully 🙂
Plus stretching and staff

 

For a left low round kick you should be facing right and for a right low round kick you should be facing left. You bring your heel up near your buttock bending your leg, you point your toes like you're on tip toes, then you unfold your leg to hit the side of your opponent's leg with the top part of your foot like a tree trunk, from the side.

 

The most vulnerable target is right behind the knee. Bear in mind you can really damage someone's leg with this so it's a self-defence move, not to be used on a friend

 

Raising the leg straight in front of you *is* a good leg stretch though, because it pushes the stretchability under your knee to its fullest, so it makes it *easier* to do front kicks with it *after* that.

 

You may have seen martial artists do the clockwise and counterclockwise "head circles" stretch. Don't! More recent medical research indicates it's a bad idea. It wears down padding on your vertebrae that eventually runs out. The human head doesn't naturally move like that. Circles with the arms, hands, shoulders, hips, and feet are a better idea - your body is supposed to move like that.

 

It's a better idea to stretch your head "yes," "no," and "maybe" from side to side, back and forth without circling

 

Good to know!

You are awesome.

I really appreciate you helping me with this

 

Thank you for asking and for paying attention! I get carried away and ramble about this a lot, I take a while to get to the point sometimes. Thanks for being patient.

 

I enjoy talking about this too much, I have no saturation point but I realize other people do XD You'll have to be the brake for this I'm the accelerator

 

Make sure to "lock" the knuckles with your thumb right when you form a fist to punch. I did this wrong for like ten years until my early twenties. With a straight punch you want to hit with the index and middle finger knuckles specifically.

 

There are different "types" of backhands. With or without spin, and recoil or follow-through. If your stance is left foot ahead for example, it's natural to do a left recoil backhand with no spin - or a right follow-through backhand with spin. The recoil is more guarded but follow-through has more momentum. You aim for the side of the head.

 

You can also "swivel back" into place from a backhand with your rear hand. The spin does mean the risk of taking your eyes off for an instant but also doubles as a potential dodge.

 

Neck stretches

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/7jZ1GAkLN-E

 

Shoulder stretches

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/GcS2CHSjO5Y

 

Arm circles

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/t8Tf5cNROII

 

Side arm stretches

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/mv9PA4z4_K8

 

Fake weight lifts

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Vlmgewaos1o

 

Foot stretches

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/CqBr3K1FYtk

 

Leg stretches

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/MVlYVIzDJWA

 

Hand stretches

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/EEr_paWG0TA

 

Are you still interested in the staff fighting? Feel free to say no! I'm big on the check-in I really mean it 🙂

 

Yes, but pause, I haven't watched the new videos yet

 

No problem! Thank you

 

Would mudras from Hinduism or those like 'jutsu' things from Naruto count as 'hand stretches' do you think?

 

Yes, absolutely! 😮 The "mudra" category is correct 🙂 The sub-category you're thinking of is "Kuji-In," the Nine Seals, or "hand-knitting." ^^ There are also specific Shaolin hand forms that count (crane, mantis, snake, etc)

 

Some of the best stretching advice I've heard came from the actor who played Nightcrawler as the yoga instructor who teaches Niles and Daphne on that episode of Frasier: "You should be feeling discomfort, not pain. If you feel pain, ease yourself gently back into discomfort."

 

It occurs to me that in addition to the staff fighting it may be a good idea to do a short series on your defense game - parrying, blocking, and dodging. You also mentioned not having done a lot of stance work or footwork. It'll take me some time to put it together anyway so no pressure, just let me know whether you'd be interested or not. 🙂

 

Yesss, that would complement the fencing aspect I want to learn at some point too!!

 

My father taught me fencing in our backyard when I was growing up! He was in championships with the masks and everything

 

You'll want to practice moving in and out of range a lot! That's a useful skill set for that kind of mindset, I would think. You want to develop a "hit and run" fighting style. "Spring Attack" in D&D terms.

 

My first instinct is to breeze through everything too fast, because martial arts set off a part of my brain that's like addicted to talking about them or something to that effect. The thing is, intellectually, I understand it's often a better idea to take a little longer to process new information. You need time to practice something more than once before you move on to something else. Right now, I have four short series of videos planned - the second set of combos, the defence game, the stances and footwork, and the staff fighting.

 

I watched the stretching videos, you can send the next set.

 

I have 10 staff sequences ready and a few explanatory notes in mind for your staff stuff assembled right now! I should be able to film them for you as soon as I'll have the kitchen to myself for a bit 🙂

 

Looking forward to it!

 

staff:

4 stances (back, side, thrust, upright)
clockwise & counterclockwise circles
blocks: down + L + R + up (L low + R low)
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/teqvWOgZYNI

1) low thrust-thrust-low thrust-thrust.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/B7oy3tclQLs

2) L upswing-R arc (spin L) thrust.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Ybzxmptoghk

3) L upswing-R swing-L swing (spin R) R backswing.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/wkeXylkAavA

4) L upswing-R swing (spin L) thrust.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/8xS0xASmYfU

5) R arc-L arc-R arc (spin L) thrust.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/5MsXXTAu-EA

6) R arc (spin L) R arc-R front kick.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/x2WD6RIG4is

7) R swing-L low swing-R arc.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/QYOyj2mOQcw

8) R swing-L low swing-R low swing-L swing.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/plXd0cxUlFE

9) R upswing-L upswing-R upswing (spin L) thrust.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/HbDaMFwASAQ

10) thrust-R swing-L arc.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/M8KKnBOx88Q

 

You grab the staff at roughly 1/3 and 2/3 of its length - most of the time it should be divided into 3 sort of equal parts by your hands. The space between your hands is for blocking. The parts near the ends are for attacking. Low swings go behind the knee, same as for low round kicks. I classify arc "sides" based on which hand is nearest to the attack tip on the way down.

 

Same with upswings

 

Low blocks are with the ends though! You're not getting down there with your arms that fast realistically. You use them to guard your legs. You can also lift your leg over a low swing to avoid it.

 

You'll think I'm kidding, but sweeping is actually very helpful for staff practice. It trains you to take the space around you into account, which is important for a reach weapon. It also gives you practice to change your grip to adapt to new situations you're in.

 

Note that these are also mirrored because of the way I had to do the filming - right and left should be interverted, like in a manga

 

My form would've probably been better outside but I had to be careful not to hit the shelves, stove or light fixture XD This should still give you a fairly good idea overall though

 

woot! Will watch these soon, thank you so much 🎉

 

I'll give you some time to catch up before I continue! 🙂 I'm thinking next time I do stances, then footwork, then defence, then maybe a few basic grappling ones possibly? If you think you could use knowing how to sidestep and maybe an arm lock or two at some point.

 

Huh, I can almost see how you could incorporate the ginga step with some of the blocks you showed here 🤔

 

Yes, absolutely! Good thinking 🙂

 

I am loving the aquatic imagery that is coming to mind with the staff work, that could be a good strong metaphor to help with memory and learning I think

 

Logs naturally float on water after all! That's what the old log drivers used to rely on. It's also a very "flowing" motion when you do it right, yeah. Take an oar, a rake, a mop, a broom, a shovel, a pool cue, or a parasol. You can find a staff-like weapon almost anywhere in the modern world. Using any of them is not only good staff practice itself, just thinking about how you'd have to move to use them already teaches you things about staff fighting and helps you understand it better.

 

so another thing I am wondering just in general theory of it all, how do you know what tactics to use and forms like using martial arts in self defense, does your body just remember the forms from practice, and if someone isn't fully learned in how to self defend and just react / fight back or what game terms call 'fighting dirty' or 'improv fighting' like what makes one more 'formed/combo/tactics than the other? am I making sense?

 

You are, that's a very good question in fact! ^^ I'm thinking about the answer 🙂

 

Feel free to come up with your own names for moves or sequences if it helps you! There's no wrong way to do it

 

There are pros and cons to dissociation I'm sure. Sometimes it might help maintain distance from the right things at the right times. It's about setting things up for you so you pay attention to the right things at the right times for what *your* goals are, when you add it all up. In self-defense situations strategic considerations come into play. Having your back to a wall is bad against one person, because you can't run. It's good against two people, because they can't sneak up on you. If you have more than one opponent there are a lot of moves designed to fight two people at once but ideally you want to try to bottleneck them. With the staff distance is mostly your friend. If someone else has a reach weapon you want to break distance as much as possible. The same factors can be good or bad depending on the situation you're in.

 

If you wanted to learn an animal style, I think I'd feel most comfortable with snake style! It's the one I have the most experience with overall.

 

This is the first stance taught in a wide variety of martial arts. In karate it's called Zenkutsu Dachi: the Bow and Arrow Stance. We were just talking about archery the other day! You'll notice it looks like the lower guard hand looks almost like it's drawing back a string from a bow held in the front hand, hence the name. Your feet should be twice the width between your shoulders on the ground from side to side. They should be at the same front/back distance as their left/right distance is. Here you see it as four tiles each way. Your knees should be "half-bent," with your thighs at a diagonal and your shins straighter. You should try to keep your back as straight as possible while lowering your center of gravity. You "plant" yourself to defend and to deliver your attacks. The front high hand guards your face, the back low hand guards your solar plexus. This is a good "hinge" stance, that acts as a bridge between other stances, which is why it's often taught first.

 

Stance 2: the back leg slant. In Tai Chi or Kung Fu, it's called Taming The Tiger. The front hand looks like it's trying to keep the top of a tiger's head close to the ground. Starting from a bow & arrow stance, you "fall" and "back up" on the back leg. You bring your back shoulder as close to your back knee as you can. Your back hand guards your face. Your front hand guards your front knee. Your front leg should be completely straight. Your back leg is supporting basically all of your weight. You keep your eyes carefully up on your opponent from below. This is a stance that was invented to serve as a quick way to dodge high kicks.

 

Stance 3: the crouch. Another good way to dodge high kicks. The crossed hands in front of you guard your head. Your legs guard your body. It can be done from an everyday stance. The key is to stretch your knees well, keep your center of gravity close to the ground, your back straight and, again, your eyes up. Train and stretch your ankles to practice keeping your balance. Capoeira calls this cocorhina, the egg-laying stance. You can stand up from it pushing with your legs right into a rising headbutt to the chin.

 

Stance 4: the infamous crane's leg stance. It seems obvious and overdone, but I can't emphasize how useful practicing it actually is. All your kicks become easier the better you get at it, because they're all about learning how to balance on your other foot. The raised leg dodges a low kick, but the raised foot can also defend against one. It's good knee strike practice. It will make you more secure in your footwork. The raised foot guards the knee, the knee guards from some kicks - although you'll want to be ready to shift your front guard to your kicking hip if it's targeted as you kick. It also makes you harder to knock down if you're more used to working on a single leg.

 

Stance 5: in Kung Fu this is called the False Leg stance. Starting from bow & arrow, your front foot "slides" back across the ground without lifting it. It ends up in front of your back foot. Your back foot is flat on the ground but your front foot is on tiptoes. 90% of your weight is on your back foot. It's a quick way to withdraw out of range of a close range attack. Your front foot is right between a crane leg and a bow & arrow stance. If your front leg were swept and you're doing it right it shouldn't affect your balance otherwise. Easy to slide forward after backing out of range to counter right after you defend. Your back leg should be as straight as possible. Your front leg is "loose" like a mannequin, hence "false leg." It's a very "liquid" stance. Your leg can either "evaporate" into a kick or "solidify" into a more grounded stance.

 

Stance 6: the front leg slant. You can see right away how it takes the same logic as the back leg slant but reverses it. 90% of your weight goes on your front leg. Your front knee should be as close to your front shoulder as you can. Your back leg should be as straight as possible. Good way to get under high, close punches and to deliver long, low fist strikes to the abdomen or crotch. Also a good fencing stance - you can see how it would work well for a lunge thrust. You can see how the side leg stretches are designed to prepare you for both leg slants. It's one of the stances used in snake style - it's like a snake lunge.

 

Stance 7: the Horse Stance. Foundational to a ton of Kung Fu. You can see right away why they call it a horse riding stance. Your legs are wide like you're riding a horse. They should be at a 90 degree angle. You have to pay close attention to keep your back straight, the instinct is to lean. Also a good way to get under high punches to deliver low ones. Makes your legs stronger the more you do it, which makes your kicks stronger and your stance work more stable. You can descend into it from the bow & arrow stance or from the side stance, which we will cover last. It should look like you're sitting in an invisible chair.

 

Stance 8: kneeling. I know this one is a bit more challenging for some people but I thought I'd include it anyway. Another useful low stance for dodging high and striking low. It doesn't commit you to being near or far from your opponent like the leg slants do. You keep your back straight, unless you're given reason not to. You can also go after your opponent's legs from it, with your legs or arms. Keep your eyes and guard up. In staff fighting it works well with a rising block. If you get knocked down, being familiar with this stance can help you regain control.

 

Stance 9: a karate stance called Kokutsu Dachi. Your hands are in "karate chop" hand forms. Your front hand faces the side while your back hand faces up. Your back foot faces the side at a 90 degree angle from your front foot, which faces forward. Your heels should be aligned with your back as straight as possible. A slightly more advanced stance, with roughly 2/3 of your weight on your back foot and 1/3 on the front. Again, the hand chop can be used for horizontal, vertical, direct or reversed attack, or to parry. It works a little like a sword so there are transferable notions to fencing. You use it to "slash" or redirect.

 

Stance 10: and finally what karate calls Yoko Dachi, the Side Stance. Your knees are only half-bent, not fully bent like with the horse stance. Your feet and body face the side while you look at your opponent over your "front" shoulder. Your heels are aligned. This is a good stance for side kicks, or for quick crab walks forward and backward. It significantly reduces your "hit frame" in gaming terms, as you present a narrower target while still giving you a full range of attacks. Your front limbs have speed, your back limbs have momentum. You'll notice the similarity to the logic in fencing, in which this is also a good stance.

 

Stances take a lot less space to practice than staff fighting - just enough space to stand up, really

 

This is one of my favorite staff fights in film - you can really see how the pole fighter is forced to improvise to react to all kinds of different situations:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZANYMihNZM

 

Another three minute staff fight from the old 95 Mortal Kombat:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHkIynDSFIw

 

This one is two minutes long, it's from an old 80's comedy I grew up watching too many times:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2ygGoHSuPQ

 

Another more serious pole weapon VS sword fight, two or three minutes long on a bridge, from the anime Samurai Champloo. Like in Hero, it's a pole, not strictly a staff, but they're wielded similarly enough for it to count, I'd say. Note how she's using the limited space on the bridge around them to her advantage, being blind as she is:

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5QOvlwxdPAI

 

Defence 1:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/aiWlhT0GBnE

We get the X-block from Muay Thai. You make an X with your forearms and try to "catch" the punch or kick coming from any vertical or horizontal direction. It's useful because it's so easy to learn and apply almost without thinking. The combined forearms give you a wide defensive range. It's only less useful against direct attacks, like jabs, thrusts or push kicks for example. It's like fighting a skeleton: a swing and a thrust hit differently. It's good to block more powerful attacks because you're using the strength of two arms too. Actually that is also a block from an ancient "shackled hands" form from an ancient African martial art called Kupigana Ngumi.

 

Defence 2:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/t4rxwLD3n5g

Slash. You ideally want to do this one in a better Kokutsu Dachi, but I half-assed the stance to focus on the hand. You do a "chop" hand form and move your hand fingers up and palm forward from "inside" to "outside." If you were doing an attack chop your hand would be horizontal. Since you're defending your hand is vertical. That's because you're targeting the limb, not the body - you want it to be perpendicular. That's one way to redirect a direct attack to your torso. You want to make sure it's aligned with your other fingers the right way, so it reinforces them the right way. You need to parry with the side of the hand itself, not your pinky finger.

 

Defence 3:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/HPpjRT41NZs

The False Leg Chop. You use the outer side of your hand below the fingers, from inside to outside, while backing off into a false leg stance. A good low parry to stop a low punch for example. This one is from Kung Fu.

 

Defence 4:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/sWjq0aw528k

The In-Out Block. You block from inside to outside in front of you to stop a lateral attack coming at you from the outside, like a hook or a round kick. The back of your hand faces your opponent. The slight "grasping" gesture with the other hand first isn't strictly necessary, but it's a useful way to emphasize how the momentum of the block is supposed to work. This is a karate block, not a kung fu parry. The fist is closed, not open

 

Defence 5:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/TNBf8EMhEMI

The Karate Low Block, or Gedan Barai. From a bow & arrow stance, you bring your closed fist over your opposite shoulder, then you swing it down toward outside over your knee on the same side. Designed to stop low kicks

 

Defence 6:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/-p-4IX8KDNc

The Mirror Polish. A Kung Fu parry with your fingers up and your palm facing you, moving from "inside" to "outside." You deflect the blow with the inside of your forearm. It kind of looks like you're polishing a mirror with your hand, that's why it's called that. Your other palm should be near your attack arm's elbow facing up, fingers forward. A good way to redirect a high strike to the eyes or neck for example. Your forearm does kind of a 90 degrees movement. It looks somewhere between setting up the "come at me" gesture with the parrying hand and pulling out your phone to look at it from your opposite pocket

 

Defence 7:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/vPwgzRngDpA

The Karate Out-In Block. You bring your fist up near your ear on the same side, then you swing your forearm horizontally across your face. This is mostly to stop a horizontal attack coming from the opposite side of your arm. You can see how it could be used to deflect a direct attack too, if you time it right. Also since it's karate my other fist should be at my hip but it's not, don't tell anyone

 

Defence 8:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/rZ4GOMMnTn8

The Karate Rising Block. Here you can see I'm doing the hip thing right with the other fist this time! This is designed to stop any kind of axe punch, hammer punch or downward elbow strike type of attack. Your horizontal forearm comes up from your hip until it's over your head, fist closed, wrist facing up and away from you. It's important it actually reaches over your head because the whole idea is to stop a descending strike from reaching your head ^^

 

Defence 9:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/HCE6NomOYJ0

The Kung Fu Wood Chop Parry. Starting from a bow & arrow stance, you back off into a false leg stance. Making a "chopping" hand form, you bring your hand down as though you're chopping wood. The strike point should be below your fingers, on top of an attacker's front kicking foot to stop it from reaching your crotch.

 

Defence 10:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/yT1JTiq7vyM

The Jeet Kune Do Eight Way Palm Parry. Jeet Kune Do was the "way of the intercepting fist," etymologically. Here you don't use the forearm, the fist or the side of the hand but the palm. There are 8 directions: upper left, lower left, upper right, lower right, with the right hand or the left hand. You keep the hand firm to kind of "slap" a punch or kick out of the way before it can reach you. You're like "Oh no you don't!" It's designed to be easy to integrate instinctively without having to think too much about it. Put together and used well, they can form a full defence game all by themselves.

 

By "game" I'm referring to a combination of your arsenal, hand-eye coordination, and current type of strategy associated with various martial skill sets. As in your arm game, leg game, offense game, defense game, or grappling game, for example. A kata, form or set is more like a longer sequence of movements, or a long series of combos that you're all supposed to memorize and practice in the same order. Bruce Lee famously opposed forms, as a matter of fact, one of the things that made him so controversial among martial artists. Jeet Kune Do has no official forms, he preferred "shadowboxing." It's like a flexible, improvised form that you're supposed to invent as you go, to practice adapting and reacting to unpredictable situations. Lee believed that all forms did was to "freeze" knowledge, which he saw as a process. It mirrored his criticism of traditionalist philosophy in general. What I mean is if you master those 8 parries, you technically don't need to learn any other parry. They cover every avenue of attack on their own. It demonstrates his desire to "hack" martial arts, to make them accessible to the "everyman"

 

Typically open hand styles deflect with the hand and the closed fist styles resist with the forearm. The fist itself isn't blocking, it's closed to contract and concentrate the full strength and muscular tension of your forearm.

 

1) Front Kick:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/LEJPB169ovY

The front kick in Kung Fu is done with the toes pointing to hit with the top of the foot. In karate it's done with the toes raised up to hit with the hard spot under the toes on the front of the sole. Kung Fu training is done with shoes and karate barefoot. Note that it's important you don't simply raise the leg in front of you straight. There are steps: crane leg, snap, crane leg, down. This is both to maximize the impact of the strike and to minimize the amount of time your foot is vulnerable to a heelhold. In capoeira that's a ponteira, in karate it's a mae geri. You bring the fists to the kicking hip

 

2) https://www.youtube.com/shorts/1KcaZAsiXYE

Side Kick: The Side Kick is a "direct" attack. In action sometimes it'll look a little like a Roundhouse from a distance, but it's not. Again, you lift, extend, then withdraw, hit with the heel, toes to the side. In capoeira that's a chapa. In karate it's a yoko geri. Raise the toes

 

3) https://www.youtube.com/shorts/h80T6hb8T3Y

Roundhouse Kick: The Roundhouse is a lateral, horizontal attack. The Side Kick is breaking down a door - the Roundhouse is kicking the side of a tree. You hit with the top of your foot, like a front kick from the side. In capoeira that's a martelo. In karate it's a mawashi geri. Point the toes. Your fist guards your kicking hip

 

4) https://www.youtube.com/shorts/1frOPUcN5xc

Back Kick: The Back Kick distinguishes itself from the Spinning Heel Kick because you come back where you came from instead of finishing your 360 movement. It's also a direct attack as opposed to the Spin, which is also horizontal comparatively. In karate this is an ushiro geri. Hit with the heel, toes down.

 

5) https://www.youtube.com/shorts/6lsdRhPLPiU

Outside-Inside Crescent Kick: The Outside-Inside and the Inside-Outside Crescent Kicks are basically the same movement backwards and forwards. You'll see these in Capoeira a lot. They're called the meia lua de frente and queixada, respectively. In these cases you hit with the side of the foot

 

6) https://www.youtube.com/shorts/0PJQaB8FZ68

Inside-Outside Crescent Kick

 

7) https://www.youtube.com/shorts/hMa-Nz85cjM

Hook Kick: The Hook Kick is kind of like an Inside-Outside Crescent Kick but from facing the side, not the front. So your leg is oriented more for a Side kick than Front Kick. It's like the reverse motion than a Roundhouse. You hit with the heel. In capoeira that's a gancho.

 

8) https://www.youtube.com/shorts/S8DQ7pESoic

Spinning Heel Kick: This is sort of like a mix between a Back Kick and a Hook Kick. You "twist" your hips before that you "un-twist" as you lift the kicking leg, relying on momentum to see you through. It comes down to how well you balance and spin on the other foot. Extension and balance. In capoeira that's an armada

 

9) https://www.youtube.com/shorts/lWHx7er-6c8

Push Kick: This is the "bençao" of Capoeira and the "teep" of Muay Thai. You can see how it combines elements of the front kick and side kick. Here the wind-up is like lifting your foot to the upper pedal of a bike a little bit. It's used to push the opponent away

 

10) https://www.youtube.com/shorts/L8QzlEl1RgM

Axe Kick: This can be combined with either Crescent Kick or a Spinning Heel Kick, if you give them a descending trajectory and strike with the heel. Ideally you'd lift a little higher than I do here first. The higher the better. Your foot comes down like an axe.

 

You'll find varying forms and combinations of these in almost every style, by different names

 

You'll notice the leg lift before the extension in the side kick, roundhouse kick, and hook kick look like Hwoarang's taekwondo "Flamingo" stance. It's like winding up to throw a baseball a little bit. It's good to keep your opponent on their toes. Oh! Try to aim your toes on the balancing foot in the opposite direction of the kick. That helps.

 

You can use any of these ten to strike the legs, abdomen, chest or head, depending on where your opponent is and how high you can kick.

 

You'll notice the "lift then extend" rule doesn't apply to the crescent kicks or spinning heel kick. For those the legs are fully extended the whole way through. That's something else that distinguishes them from the Hook Kick, which does have a wind-up lift

 

Learning to visually recognize the different kinds of leg lifts that precede different kicks becomes an integral part of VS kicking defense strategy. It tells you which direction the kick is coming from and how to react appropriately.

 

Punch 1: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Ze0ASM4K040

Jab/Straight: I treat these as interchangeable in my notes, but I really shouldn't. With the jab, your knuckles are vertical, aimed at the face, without changing your guard with the other hand. You aim the straight at the solar plexus, with your knuckles aligned horizontal, and you bring your other hand to your hip.

 

Punch 2: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/Y6QOLKzYufQ

Axe Punch/Hammer Punch: This is the easiest, most common descending strike, aimed at the top of the head. You hit with the outer edge of the closed fist. As the name implies, it helps to pretend you're swinging a hammer or an axe, it's the same movement. Your fist goes from over either shoulder toward the center

 

Punch 3: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/_wW9z6Omdz4

Body Blow: You aim the body blow at the gut, either with your knuckles vertical or, if they're horizontal, so your closed fist's palm is looking up. The idea is to use momentum generated by your hip to knock the wind out of someone.

 

Punch 4: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/k8y3UmDi96o

Palm Strike: For this you make sure to bend your knuckles to maximize the impact and you hit with the heel of the palm, right at the lowest point near the wrist. You try to put the whole strength of your arm into it. Easy to turn into a grab, or to go from a parry to it. Aim at the face or chest.

 

Punch 5: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/lH_IWf3dWFA

Snake: The snake is typically aimed at the throat, although it can be directed at the navel or sternum too. You keep the other open palm under the striking arm's elbow to guard, strike with the aligned fingertips where it's soft and vulnerable. Picture your hand as a biting snake head.

 

Punch 6: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/k78cR6eGGQA

Reverse Snake: What it says on the tin, just like the snake punch but upside-down, so it can be worked into a series of other movements differently. It's almost like you're showing someone something on your palm, very quickly. Similar to the Mirror Polish parry, but attacking.

 

Punch 7: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/o_VlOa9aQlg

Tsuki/Sideways Thrust: This is a karate strike called the Tsuki, if it's aimed at the solar plexus. Typically it's performed in Kokutsu Dachi, aiming over the other arm like a pool cue. In kung fu, if you do it to the navel in Front Leg Slant, it's Snake Crawls Across Valley. Sideways snake basically. Also used in Bando, Hapkido, and Taekwondo

 

Punch 8: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/M1OcQ7KXAcs

Chop: Similar to the chopping parry, except that the hand is supposed to be horizontal, not vertical, because you're striking the side of the neck or torso, not redirecting an attacking limb. Typically in Kokutsu Dachi, make sure to hit with the outer edge of the hand, not the fingers.

 

Punch 9: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/gd8uFGifggA

Reverse Chop: Same as the regular chop but reversed, it helps to start it over your shoulder palm down before swinging it forward upside down for momentum, aiming at the neck, with your other hand guarding your elbow. Again it's important to strike with your hand edge, not the fingers, and to align your thumb right, keeping your hand firm

 

Punch 10: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/zHqzaZx3Uiw

Claw: For this one you keep the bent fingers separated and put as much strength in them as possible, relying on speed, force, and surprise to make up for the claws we don't have. You'll see this in a lot of animal styles. You can also reverse it or turn it into an uppercut or a downward claw

 

Capoeira 1: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/vEv4raW0vqA

Meia Lua De Costa You'll notice this is different from a spinning heel kick! You hit with the side of the foot like with the queixada and meia lua de frente, not with the heel. You twist your hips, then lift your leg as you untwist them. The armada is Regional, borrowed from Eastern martial arts

 

Capoeira 2: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/74FZ88V4IBY

Rolê The first stance with your head close to the ground is the negativa. One leg is bent in front of you, the other straight. The upper arm elbow guards you, the lower elbow is at your hip. The second stance is the pierna la frente, or "leg in front," where the other arm guards you. You "step over" your leg and spin as you stand.

 

Capoeira 3: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/zlvWUutAH10

Cisola From a pierna la frente, your back leg "steps over" the front as you bring your hands down behind you and extend your legs forward into some leg scissors. Your toes should be pointing in the same direction. You can "slide" forward across the ground using your hands.

 

Capoeira 4: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/rN4wDerFjLY

Corta Capim From a pierna la frente, supporting yourself on your hands, you lift your back leg and "finish" the movement of the front leg wrapped around it, to bring it into a full circle on the ground around you, toes up.

 

Capoeira 5: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/avVG-VZba-w

Au You'll notice the Angola aù keeps the legs closer to the ground. The legs protect your body, threaten a kick, and present a smaller target. You cartwheel over sweeps, and as a way to move around the roda

 

Capoeira 6: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/3i6ioaf4hLg

Chapa De Frente This is kind of like a ponteira from a queda de quatro. It doesn't flow "into" a lot, so you have to back away and spring up from it. It "goes for broke," relying on the element of surprise. Kicks from the ground protect your head from high strikes.

 

Capoeira 7: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/3_la6uTuR1w

Chapa De Costa (+ Bananeira) A back kick with your hands on the ground. You keep your eyes on your opponent upside-down between your legs as you kick. The handstand is to dodge a sweep aimed at your support leg. Bananeira means banana tree

 

Capoeira 8: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/tTk0Lhp-rck

Rabo De Arraia A spinning heel kick with your hands on the ground. The name means "stingray's tail." This is the Angola name, in Regional it's a meia lua de compasso and the name rabo de arraia exists, but it's the scorpion kick - which is also called an escorpiao.

 

Capoeira 9: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/9x-8kk5H7us

Martelo Do Chao A roundhouse kick with your hands on the ground. Technically this one is not an Angola move, just Regional and Senzala, but I find it integrates with other Angola moves well. You can do it one-handed, with the opposite hand, if you choose.

 

Capoeira 10: https://www.youtube.com/shorts/DZXe4_-GwBs

Rasteira A front sweep is kind of like a negativa that's rotating. With your hands on the ground, raise your toes so the top of your foot "hooks" behind your opponent's heel on the opposite side. Your support leg should be as bent and your kicking leg should be as straight as possible.


books read

Oct. 18th, 2025 07:33 pm
spacewastrel: my fursuit head (Default)
This list is incomplete and should be updated on an ongoing basis:



spacewastrel: my fursuit head (Default)

spacewastrel: my fursuit head (Default)
This list is incomplete and should be updated on an ongoing basis:



spacewastrel: my fursuit head (Default)
This list is incomplete and should be updated on an ongoing basis:


spacewastrel: my fursuit head (Default)
This list is incomplete and should be updated on an ongoing basis


spacewastrel: my fursuit head (Default)
 Competition is not beautiful 

Poli Sci

Feb. 28th, 2025 03:17 pm
spacewastrel: my fursuit head (Default)
(I wrote this as a series of responses to questions a friend of mine asked me about politics a year or two ago.
The questions were about the US military and whether or not a compassionate capitalist utopia could exist in sci-fi.
It needs to be edited but here's the raw version of it for now, just so it continues to exist *somewhere*)


1) Do you know how Augusto Pinochet replaced Salvador Allende in Chile?
1) No.
Salvador Allende was a beloved, democratically elected socialist leader in Chile whose success threatened the US idea that socialism could only fail. The US had him assassinated and replaced with the unelected capitalist dictator Augusto Pinochet to prove capitalist superiority.
 
2) Do you know what caused the Cuban embargo and what its effects have been on the Cuban people?
2) No.
Cuba was a communist country that didn't have wealth as a possible social reward but where everyone at least had what they needed to live. The US felt that its success threatened capitalist supremacy, so they blocked all trade and humanitarian aid to Cuba. That's why Cuban cigars were illegal for so long. A lot of people in need didn't get the help they needed for someone to prove that sharing is bad and hoarding is good.
 
3) Do you know how Osama Bin Laden received the weapons he used on 9/11?
3) Your guess of the American military is correct! :) It was not an "inside job," they just sold him the rope to hang them with, so to speak. He had a different mission back then, but he kept the weapons afterwards, and went his own way with them.
 
4) Did you know 9/11 was retaliation for a similar attack against two towers in the Middle East that most Americans didn't even remember?
4) I wasn't paying attention to the news until 9/11 happened either, I was about 20, I'm about 40 now. I didn't pay attention to the news for half my life! Even now, I can't remember which Middle Eastern country it was specifically or the details of the attack without looking it up. It seemed telling.
 
5) Do you know how Saddam Hussein got into power in Iraq in the first place?
5) All I knew about Saddam's installation was that he was set up as a secular dictator to replace the fanatic warlords that ruled the area before, but I wasn't sure which president in fact! Reagan or Bush might make sense, but I'd have to look it up. More fanatics filled his power vacuum.
 
6) Do you know what the implications of the US support of Israel against the Palestinian people are, how it followed from Jewish relocation after World War 2?
6) No. Leaving the Muslims out is not an accident. After WWII, the Jews persecuted by Hitler were "relocated" by Americans to Palestine. Now, the Palestinians never agreed to this! The US sold the displaced Jews land that didn't belong to them. They fund Israel's military because it gives them access to local resources and political influence. What the US and Israel are doing to the Palestinians has been counted as genocide. Yes, there are losses on both sides, but when you look at the figures, those of Israel are vanishingly small, and those among Palestinians are astronomical. Israel is fighting with tanks and rocket launchers. Palestine is fighting back with sticks and stones. Apex of Islamophobia worldwide.
 
7) Do you know how the US keeping Guantanamo Bay open looks from an international perspective?
7) Warlords/slavers/big bullies is close enough, you get this one. XD It's true that it's for dangerous prisoners of war. Basically it operates a lot of interrogation and punishment through torture, against the Geneva convention. So it technically makes the US international war criminals.
 
8) Do you remember what ended up happening with the search for Weapons of Mass Destruction during the Iraq war?
8) No idea. Kept or sold to Russia or China? Pentagon bunker? This is a trick question. :) After a thorough search, it turned out that there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq at all. The threat had been completely manufactured by politicians to justify invading, unrelated to Osama.
9) Do you know how it's seen by most of the world that the US went to war with Iraq against a UN resolution condemning it?
9) No, didn't know the UN said anything about it. House on an oil spot is also correct! Going to war against a UN resolution is also a war crime.
 
10) Did you know that millions of public funds are funneled into military spending while they never "have enough money" for social programs at home?
10) Yes. Props! It makes sense you'd have run into this. I'm appreciating how much you're engaging with the questions so far btw.
 
11) Did you know the People for a New American Century already had a Middle East invasion plan ready for America years before 9/11 happened?
11) No. Christian organization? Yes and no. The Bushes and a few rich powerful people like Bill Kristol and Paul Wolfowitz. Again, I'm not saying they "did 9/11," just that 9/11 gave them the most readily available version of an opportunity that they'd already been looking for in the first place.
 
12) Did you know that a lot of refugees that come to the United States are escaping from countries that the US bombed themselves to end up trapped or rejected?
12) No, never really thought about it. Odd, why would they want to come here? They could go elsewhere? Finland maybe? Doesn't make sense. Well, a lot of them come from countries where their access to information is limited. Until Trump, the international image of the US was all "give us your poor, tired, huddled masses," especially in some less informed areas. Sometimes they may also not get as much choice about where they're going as they might like.
 
13) Did you know that when the military has to spend as much of the money that it asked for to justify its spending, giving them an incentive to look for targets?
13) I phrased that question wrong, that's my fault. XP I lost track halfway through. It's true that Google doesn't help with a lot of it. I just meant, let's say they buy 10 bombs. If the quarter ends and they set off 5 bombs, some banker somewhere is going to be all like "Next time you ask for 10, you get 5, you liar!" So if it's a few days from the end of the quarter they're like "damn we better blow some shit up!" >.>
 
14) Did you know that the military often gets used domestically against First Nations protesters who are standing up against environmental destruction?
14) Makes sense, Minnesota/Michigan pipelines, POC protest/rally, big guns. I don't remember the specific location offhand either but it was definitely in one of those. We had more than our fair share of First Nations VS pipeline protests up here, I hasten to add, and our military/police was no better than the US. Another risk is that the police is becoming more and more militarized, declaring war against the American population.
 
15) Did you know that American soldiers often rape and torture enemy soldiers, taking pictures with them like hunting trophies, and never face any repercussions?
15) Yes. Blue wall & green wall is a very accurate comparison in fact. I never saw the movie but you're making me want to.
 
16) Did you know that, rather than noble Spartan side-by-side combat, most US warfare is now carpet bombing civilians from planes without ever seeing them?
16) This one was just me being kind of a douche, I don't think it was some of my best work. I do understand the ideal as you describe it. I'm never trying to devalue the lives of the people who were conscripted or drafted or pushed by economic circumstances to enlist. So many social factors are geared toward creating this funnel to the military! The fact that they don't invest in education and social programs isn't an accident. They want people poor and - though they may be smart - without the opportunity of education so that they'll have no choice but to enlist. It's an investment.
 
What I do get is, often, people do the best they can to be the best person they can be - no pun intended - within their own framework.
 
I don't doubt that a lot of individual soldiers were not necessarily bad people the way we understand it - but I don't doubt that war is a bad thing.
 
Thank you for being patient with me! Again, we're all working from our own subjective perspective, if you think I'm full of shit tell me! I'll listen.
 
I will say this at 4 minutes in - under capitalism, here on Earth, it's important to understand that no homeless person is an accident or a mistake. They're not only victims of intentional violence by the State, but the State uses them as weapons against the rest of us to make us scared and obedient. They assume - correctly - that one one would obey them if they weren't forced to at the barrel of a gun. "Capitalism but with compassion" seems like, well, *socialism*. The cruelty is the *point*. It's a *feature*, not a bug, working *exactly* as intended. But! Let me see where you're going with this though :)

I *am* seeing parallels with the "alternative" Ferengi approach with how Rom and Ishka acted to be sure, but that *also* took a few "creative liberties" with the concept of capitalism, even though it was still money-based (note that money also sometimes exists in communist or socialist settings, it's just used differently). I also remember its part in the situational ethics around women's liberation in the Middle East by Irshad Manji for example (who I named Irshad after, incidentally). There are definitely better *versions* of capitalism that are possible, I mean, Canada is *technically* capitalist, but it's sort of a mixed system, and it's best known for its socialist *elements*. Note that some people use capitalism and democracy interchangeably, assuming that democracy wouldn't exist in socialist or communist countries because it hasn't in a few high profile cases. Meanwhile when a socialist *is* democratically elected they get assassinated by the CIA to maintain the illusion of that equivalence. And capitalists are *definitely* looking for a way to have capitalism *without* democracy these days, especially in the States unfortunately :P
 
On some level corporations *can* be ironically a little more "democratic" than governments. Some governments make more of a pretense of listening to people because they only need to get elected every four years, if that - the rest of the time they do whatever they want. Now corporations do give more *sway* to the rich than poor, which is a *huge* problem *but*, it can be just as easy for a rich person to buy a government as a corporation. At least on a surface level corporations have to act in a way that makes people *want* to buy their stuff. It's not true morality because it's self-interested, but like the Democratic party, it's a long-term imperative for an *appearance* of justice. In theory there's supposed to be the threat of a better company beating you if you don't. Of course, in practice there are often oligarchies or mergers that make more and more of the money go to the same *places* - but of course the entire work of utopia (or heterotopia?) is to imagine a world where the *implications* are different because the *parameters* are different.
Corporations need us in the same way that parasites can't kill their hosts. They might be taking advantage of us, but they need us to live, so if they're not stupid, they won't want us dead outright.
 
I do remember His Dark Materials! I'm also reminded of car racers and other athletes who wear corporate logos all over like walking advertisements
 
On a basic level, a corporation not being a person means it can't be held accountable - so it should never make a management decision XD
 
I don't remember who but a famous sex worker once said "We're all selling our bodies, some of us are just more honest about it."
 
I mean if I could end capitalism outright now I'd definitely *prefer* it, but it's also not an excuse not to try to soften its blows for *now*. There are a lot of small things in the way things are which could change without a complete overhaul, or at least *before* one. *We* need to abolish money, but it's not wrong to give money to a homeless person *now*. I wouldn't want a "softer" capitalism to become an excuse that keeps us trapped in it - but it could also very well serve as "training wheels" that show us we don't need its harshness to be at our best at *all*. This is just what's popping into my head as I go! I'll totally listen if you think I'm wrong I'm just trying to throw stuff at the wall and see what sticks if that makes sense
 
I'm realizing there's so much hypocrisy in capitalism *in practice* - for example, the way competition is supposed to keep things healthy but someone's always ready to "nerf" it every time it comes up. We almost don't know what capitalism that *does* keep its promises would look like. You could *almost* say - as people say about communism and quite rightly so - that capitalism has "never been attempted." :P
 
I *really* want to send you a book by Krishnamurti sometimes! I'm reminded of how he used to talk about how the point of education should be so much *more* than to turn us into workers, that it was so sad this was all we saw it as. It's kind of like the job tests from Futurama with the chips in their hands, if you'll forgive my analogy!
 
At the same time, it's *so* hard to find work - if there *was* suddenly a system that actually *helped* me get a damn job instead of blaming me for "not wanting one" because it's not *accessible*. There was the idea of a caregiving, organizing "overmind" in the Iain Banks "Culture" series I think!
 
I don't think that robots would necessarily be *better* than people, although I get the appeal of that. Robots are often *programmed* by people, *but* - it's easier to program a robot with your ideals than to pass them on to another person, if you're thinking in "legacy" terms, for what it's worth.
 
The Laws of Robotics open up a whole *other* conundrum as an aside but I'm with you so far :)
 
Technically a lot of Respawn is based around presenting a "negative version" of communism, which is a system I *do* believe in. I wanted to explore one of the ways it can go wrong if it's not approached in the "right" spirit, or with parameters that force us proles to deny our fundamental humanity. I didn't do that to shoot it *down* but like, since that *is* what we want, we should think about the things that can go wrong with it *before*, so we can see them coming and *stop* them. It occurs to me imagining a "positive version" of capitalism is almost a corresponding challenge philosophically, just without a one-to-one equivalency that maps right *onto* it.
 
It might be better to *start* with small cosmetic "fixes" to capitalism when we're able to simply because it's so resistant to change. Don't get me wrong, I kind of think that like... When capitalism stops killing people, it needs to be called something else, because that's just what it *is*: a belief that might makes right and that some people deserve to live more than others. But! I don't mean that in a way to discourage you from exploring your idea. It's definitely thought-provoking! It forces outside-the-box thinking. I mean you're imagining a whole different society *around* it. A lot of their tech and social forces would have to be different around it in ways that seem unimaginable to us *too*. If capitalism was about competing for *luxuries* but people's basic *needs* were accounted for, well, that's sort of the Canadian/Scandinavian "hybrid" system of capitalism with socialist elements at work. It's definitely not "fuck-you libertarianism" for what it's worth.
 
A question that occurs to me about your work with this idea: if people within the system you describe accept it and take it for granted, what becomes the source of the conflict in the story? Would it be an interpersonal conflict about something else that simply has this society as a *backdrop*? Because that can totally work mind you! I'm just curious. If no one's fighting the system, is anyone fighting *anything*? Of course the "necessity" of conflict in narrative is *also* a capitalist idea - "slice of life" stories can be just as valid. You could also showcase people competing for luxuries that are *meaningful* to them, tied to their personal histories and personality in some way, where the reader would become invested in who would Get The Thing.
 
So much of it comes down to how smart the people in charge are! I can't help but think of anarchy specifically because it *minimizes* the amount of people who are in charge, but there's no "clean" way to it with the way things are for now. We'd have had to build society differently in the first place, which is part of why envisioning a whole society from head to toe can prove so engaging.
 
All the corporations in Pokemon are so *friendly*. They all seem so invested in how well you're doing! It always strikes me how much it's not like real life, but like, I *like* it. It's not always bad to imagine.
 
I can see this is starting at a deeper level - you're looking for a way to exist as *part* of capitalism in *your* life, because you don't *have* long-term solutions handy, and you need to be able to find a way to make a living in *your* lifetime. I don't blame you! Peggy would be the first to tell you there's no shame in making a living
 
I wish I could get a real job myself tbh :( I just have so much to do every day I can't even imagine having enough time to have a job and still do it all somehow *headshakes*
 
An element of darkness and conflict doesn't hurt either mind you, and can even help make the lighter parts stand out. Moreover, they can hang lanterns on some parts of the "imagined" that don't fit with the "real" the way we expect. On paper a strictly literal Christian could be a super nice person! Some of them *are*. It's just that with things the way they are society and History make that concept uniquely situated in an inescapable *way*. You're trying to *disarticulate* those concepts, to see if it can be *done*. Maybe then capitalism won't be quite as mean to *you*. A lot of short stories that showcase the worldbuilding sounds like a perfect framework!
 
It makes me think about how conservatives and progressives often don't even agree on the terms of the *debate*. Some conservatives will say even small measures to help people in the States are "socialism" so we should reject them, but when they want to deny that socialism is *working* for Canada, measures we have to help people way *more* suddenly become "not socialist enough to count." Or if they say we *are* socialists they have to explain why we're "failing" in some important way they've determined. We're Schroedinger's socialists - we are and are not socialists at the same time, depending on how it serves or doesn't serve the point that they're trying to make *at the time*.
 
If a more "compassionate" version of capitalism existed you'd have to expect conservatives from our world to reject it as too socialist and progressives from our world to reject it too - either because it's "not socialist enough" or because it's too compassionate to still "count" as capitalism, conversely. You'd have to present a convincing case for why it can be seen as an authentic merger of both concepts that would satisfy honest readers - and accept that no amount of "doing it just right" would convince people going in with a vested interest. Maybe you can learn something writing it too! I don't know what people buy honestly - if I did I'd have sold more than a dozen books over the last seven years :P But you'd be the first person I'd tell!
 
I mean on a basic level I try to support you and other writers in your writing as an *expression* of my anarchist, socialist principles. If I were what I see as a capitalist I would want others to *fail*, because capitalism teaches us that everything is like pie, and the more others have, the less is left over for *you*. It's all the subtle, insidious ways in which it *trains* us to be our most selfish selves by rewarding us for selfishness and punishing us for altruism. I question our ability to form real connections with others without a profound rejection of what those ideas entail. It's only natural that you'd want to - and *deserve* to - be forgiven for being "a little selfish" when the system in place has already taken so *much* from you. That desire isn't the same as that of our oppressor. Your place in the system is the *result* of *other people's* selfishness, you know?
 
Knowing the end result of failure under capitalism isn't death or destitution might give people a considerably *better* sense of humor about what *their* place in it, though. That's the thing. The winners could have everything they want and *still* leave enough for everyone else - but they've been conditioned to believe they got where they are because they understood there was no reason for them to *do* that. :P
 
Capitalism as it is seems like an expression of the belief that kindness makes us *weak*. For there to be significant measures to allow for kindness *in* it, someone, somewhere, in the history of the world you're building, would have had to have both had powers over the Way Things Are, and to have had a strong personal motivation to make that modification *to* it. You don't have to know what that is going *in* mind you, as a writer I mean, but it can be something as simple as a vibe, an unspoken understanding that permeates things somehow. Some factors that encourage corporations to think in the short term and ignore the long term would have to be absent, to make it in their *interest* to have us as "long-lived hosts."
 
Take everything I said with a huge helping of salt XD
 
The main reason the rich don't want to "fix" capitalism is they think it's working wonderfully. It gave them everything they want and stops everyone less human than they see themselves as from reaching them to *do* anything about it. Capitalism punishes the poor *by* taking those means away. To negotiate you have to have something the other person *wants*. That's something that makes union negotiations particularly difficult: it's an attempt to get the rich to admit that money for labor is an *exchange*, not something that "would just happen anyway." But they're like "If we recognize it about *this* we'd have to recognize it about *everything*!" And they *would* but like, they *should*. When the poor stop cooperating with the rich and start cooperating with each other en masse, they lose interest in negotiation - which the rich may then start finding interesting again all of a sudden :P
 
They don't see us as people they're *failing* to take care of. They see us as weights they've *successfully* thrown off their hot air balloon so they can rise *without* us. Capitalism exists to *weed us out*, but *also* depends on our labor, so it's like... eating its own tail. A "fair" capitalism would have to be one that has systems in place to make CEOs accountable for their actions in a way in which our system does *not*. It'd have to *force* them to do the right thing, in just the way in which libertarians reject regulations *today*.
 
Have you ever seen The Corporation? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Corporation_(2003_film) They talk about how GM had the choice to build their cars to save lives but instead chose to build them knowing they would kill people to make a few dollars, when they're already rich beyond measure. The corporation will always try to *present* as your friend. They are *always* lying. Their "responsibility" to their shareholders *legally obligates them* to put money ahead of human lives. The best we can do is try to use their need to maintain the illusion to make them *do* stuff. They're like Kai Winn! You can act nice to them in public and get something out of them, but don't forget what lies underneath that. I slept 4 hours stop me if I'm not making sense XD
 
If there was a mechanism in place to hold *shareholders* accountable for the ethical practices of the company they *invest* in, they might suddenly start caring a lot about that too!
 
A factor that makes this difficult with the way things are is the lack of proper international laws. Corporations are in a sense more "dangerous" than governments because they can use differences in national laws to their advantage. For example, they can go to Eastern countries where people have no money or labor standards, so that's where they have their stuff *made*, then they go back to America to sell to people with money - and labor standards. Now, America went to war with Iraq even though it was *illegal*. The UN literally said they weren't *allowed* to do it, so they were like "fuck you we're doing it anyway." Imagine how hard it could be to *change* recognized international law *on that scale* at the *expense* of the rich in *charge* of that decision. But! That didn't *have* to be the way things are. You're dealing with a whole alternate society! They may not even *have* countries. If it's a one-world government they *could* have regulations that apply *across the board*. If *their* whole society was already "built like that," they might not question that *either*. It *would* be a forced "equalizing factor." Which brings us to religion!
 
If you look at textual Christianity, they say rich people *can't get into heaven*. Now, the rich usually *pretend* to "buy" Christianity in the West because it tells the poor to be *subservient* and not to question the established order. If they *really* believed this, though, they'd never *stay* rich, or maybe never even *become* rich in the first place. We also take it for granted the children of the rich will inherit all their stuff. If there was a law forcing them to give their children a normal inheritance and donating the rest to charity, it would still let them have their ridiculous privileges *in* their lives without keeping their money "trapped" in their family for generations (and corresponding generations of poverty elsewhere). Communism *and* Objectivism were *both* supposed to be "atheistic," but people have tried adding religion to both in South America and North America respectively. It occurs to me that the embrace or rejection of religion *and* what it consists of could be totally different in *your* world. You wouldn't even have to take an *existing* one, you could *make one up*. People's spirituality or lack thereof is often tied to their process for how they imagine that their actions have consequences in *general*. It was usually used as a negative social control in *practice*, but is that an intrinsic quality or a design choice? I'm honestly not sure, but imagining new economics seems like it can't fully go around imagining new beliefs about what's valuable and what we should do about it. Fortunately that's an area you've already read about for longer than politics, as far as I can tell!
 
As much as possible I'm trying to work *within* the parameters you've defined, that is, I'm trying to come up with things that still "count" as capitalism. You can hybridize if you *choose* to, but for now I'm trying to meet the challenge of not "cheating" by having socialism come to the rescue. For example, the government should nationalize as little as possible, if at all. I mean health care is literally life or death and people *do* call it socialism if *it's* paid for. I admit that's a toughie! You run into so many things we take for granted but don't have to, trying to deconstruct and remake a system like this. I definitely think stories can be worth telling even if a misinterpretation of them is "possible," or I'd have never written anything *myself*. It *is* something I try to think about - to a *point*.
 
I mean, the Federation sets up genetic engineering as "evil," but then we run into the Denobulans and the Ilyrians - a lot of science-fiction is about exploring "edge cases" that don't quite fit the *paradigm* as which we *understand* things like that.
 
Capitalism rests on a lot of unspoken assumptions and could appear radically different if those *assumptions* were different. It just leaves the question open of at which point it becomes different enough to be something else entirely. :)
I never got around to reading the "Culture" novels they're huge! A lot of them does rest on imagining a "theoretical" capitalism that would "work" like that. I also see the starting point of it in some of the better Quark speeches. On some level, trading something is still better than just killing and taking. ... Of course Quark also does end up an arms dealer mind you, but not for long :P Everyone may have a price, but everyone also has *limits*
 
And those limits don't always translate to numbers. But it also points to how "wild," unregulated capitalism will almost always take you in a self-destructive direction, if you follow it far enough
 
When Bill Watterson had Calvin say that "becoming walking billboards for corporations is the American way to express individuality," he meant it as a *crushing indictment*. I used to know someone who sees himself as "collared" by the company he works for. He turned out to be a child molester
and a transphobe XD
 
Let's take Nintendo! I *loved* Nintendo when I was a child. Today Nintendo *characters* will still always be important to me *but*, I understand Nintendo doesn't *embody* the values those characters *represent* to me. Creatives often clash with marketers and decision-makers as part of the creative *process*. On a mass scale that means a lot of stories are being sold by people who don't care about their content at *all*. Marvel's CEO is a conservative! In the real world, Nintendo goes after fan stuff hard and have questionable labor practices. But like, Link and Mario would *never do that*. Sega died, but Sonic lived. A corporation will never be a person, but you also can't kill an *idea*. Fan work like yours is important specifically *because* it represents a *refusal* to let the corporation and its interests define what those characters *mean* to us. So well - *thank* you! <3
 
You can be critical of the person on top who claims they own something simply because they paid someone else to do it, while still honoring your connection to the spirit of the creative people they *exploited*
 
When making a "deal" with a "real" corporation, it's best to keep a smile on your face and a knife behind your back. Be as nice as you can for as long as possible to make them match you *until* it stops working. You're dealing with the Fey. They're capable of extraordinary rewards and terrible punishments, capricious and unpredictable, living by rules only they fully understand. Oh God I have to talk to you about Angel season 5! It's exactly about how demonic pacts and corporate dealings share the same logic
 
Trying to imagine "unfucked capitalism" feels like a useful exercise exactly because it forces you to think about the whole chain of events that had to go wrong for it to become the way it is in the first place XD
 
Capitalism gaslights us so thoroughly that many of us experience its direct abuse as misguided assistance :/
Like I'm telling you what I believe because I figure that's what you're *asking* me for but like, I should emphasize my friendship to you isn't conditional on agreement! This is just the point I've reached as part of a dynamic, ongoing process of thinking about these issues. :)
 
I remember when LiveJournal felt like a confidant itself almost. It helped me come out and was a hotbed of queer organizing. After 5, maybe 10 years on it, it was sold and bought by the Russian government. Russia which, for those of us who may not know or forgot, doesn't just *kill* people for *being* gay. They force gay people's *family members* to kill them, to encourage them to police their relatives' sexualities in the first place. I had a lot of thoughts about what it means to be "betrayed" by a corporation after that. People are already too good at breaking our hearts. We shouldn't give that power to corporations - they're not even people.
 
I hope it's coming across I'm excited about your project idea! It's challenging but interesting. That I'm skeptical of the idea of ethical capitalism in practice shouldn't be read as critical of your project is what I mean. I do find it impossible but science-fiction *asks* us to imagine the impossible. Respawn has an ethical law enforcement officer! And I'm dubious about how aspects of the end of Surface could be interpreted from the hindsight of today, but that's been an ongoing problem with it from the *start*
 
Sorry, this is all reminding me of when a Ferengi quotes to Nog the Rule of Acquisition that "females and finances don't mix" and Nog says "Yes, but that can be interpreted in many different ways!" XD
 
I'll admit I own a shirt with the Crush logo! I'm not emotionally invested in it at all but like, I wear it. I'm not "logo-free." It gives off a warm, refreshing vibe, it's comfortable, but I had to stop wearing it because there's a stain on it, which feels like a metaphor for *something*. o.O At the same time, the irony of *giving* a corporation *my* money to *become* an advertisement *for* them, when that's something *they* usually pay for, does not escape me.
 
Two decades ago, during the No Logo era (hi Klein!), there was a widespread belief in activist circles that corporations could be convinced to do right by exposing their negative behavior to people. Surely if people knew what evil they did, they wouldn't support them? And it worked, partly, for a while. The problem is that, increasingly, if *every* corporation that brings you something you need does something horrible, you still need to get it, so you bite the bullet. People *didn't* boycott corporations for their evil behavior. In the end, the truth proved a poor antidote to people's simple apathy. They *knew* what was going on. They just didn't *care*.
 
"Who do you think made your clothes?" (Doctor Who to Donna Noble, Planet of the Ood)
 
A good activist strategy became to find a way to force the most high-profile company in a whole field to fix its shit. The moment you get *one* to do it, if it's strong enough, *all* others have to fall in line - or become "the company that doesn't do the thing," and that's not much of a selling point. It's *forcing* the competition of capitalism to work as "intended," hijacking its rules for our own purposes.
 
If people can get things ethically *and* cheaply, they often *will*. The idea that human nature is irretrievably bad always comes back to being a conservative impetus for social control. They restrict options *then* manufacture consent as a false conclusion to the chain of events they caused in the first place.
 
America was *founded* on the principle of getting labor out of people without giving them anything, and it never looked back :P I mean, I know I don't need to tell *you* but, you know what I mean :)
 
I mean, I don't believe in the idea of a meritocracy because it's not "from each according to their ability, to each according to their need." But! That said, someone who thinks we *should* live in a meritocracy is still a much better person than someone who thinks we *do* live in one. It's more just.
 
On a basic level, if you're resisting the idea that other people's suffering for your convenience is acceptable, you're resisting capitalism, in your way. "There's no ethical consumption under capitalism" may not be an excuse, but it's definitely an explanation. At one extreme people shrug and use it to mean "I can't win so why even try?" At the other extreme, people will blame you for taking what you need from a system you didn't create, which is equally preposterous. It's okay to use the means at our disposal to try to create a better world, you know? Sometimes the master's tools are all we *have*.
 
I can't tell if "soft capitalism" is just harm reduction or a gateway drug from Big Capitalism to sell you more capitalism. I'm trying to figure it out by writing all this out to you right now honestly XD
 
There are literally Americans who call *libraries* socialism o.O
 
There is something vaguely vaporware about "compassionate capitalism" - it's something that "could've been but wasn't," to a point.
An unrealized reality
 
Elric of Melnibone is interesting because it's another "What if" science-fantasy book series about a scenario that "shouldn't be but is." Elric is the "benevolent dictator" who exists as the "anti-Conan" in the Conan the Barbarian universe, written by Michael Moorcock. I only read the first two sometime during the mid-to-late aughts but there's more. Now in the real world there's no such *thing* as a benevolent dictator and like, it's *important* to remember that, and to remember *why*. *Every* dictator wants to be seen as that, and to rob people of free will is to rob them of dignity on a basic level. But like, Elric *is* presented as *contextually* heroic, and he *does* make a convincing anti-hero, as opposed to a full-on villain. Moorcock talks about American politics in interviews and is smart about what's going on in the world, doesn't let people off the hook or buy any of the bullshit. Elric's enemies are all *gleefully* cruel, whereas he only is so grudgingly. He knows if he shows too much "weakness," his enemies will take over his land, and inflict *their* cruelty on his subjects *gleefully*. We have access to his internal monologue and regret over what he has to do in a way that's impossible with a real person. Elric kills 5 today so someone else won't kill 50 tomorrow. Where Conan is young, Elric is so old he needs magic, technology, and sacrifices to stay alive. Where Conan hates magic, Elric is the most powerful sorcerer in his world. Where Conan is uncompromising in his heroism, Elric represents the tragic, twisted heroism of the "necessary evil," an attempt to understand, if not to justify either.
 
If a sentient computer overmind capable of emotion were somehow theoretically programmed to think of the citizens of the planet it oversees as its "children" by someone with a healthy conception of what that is (however unlikely that may be or not in the real world *practice*), it could - again in theory - do everything it can to try to guarantee their long-term interest, even. That would alter the way concepts like money and jobs affect people's lived experiences significantly
"Aliens can do almost anything."
 
Planned obsolescence would be something you could make a decision about how you'd approach, if you chose to. In "as is" capitalism, corporations deliberately make products more breakable and shorter-lasting to force people to keep buying the same thing over and over, creating more waste. In "compassionate" capitalism, you'd need an incentive to stop corporations from doing that, or a disincentive to punish them when they do - or both. It could still have, like, have money and jobs, be capitalism on *paper*, but conservatives might choose to describe it as communistic because it's not the *free market* capitalism that libertarians dream of. Regulations are an ongoing point of contention in those spheres. A lot of it depends how far you can get people to accept to *stretch* their definition of capitalism or not is what I mean. There's a wide definition and a narrower one, depending on the situation. I hope I'm making sense!
It's a complex question, I'm trying to not give a half-assed answer, you know?
 
The "Bond sleeps with Russian spy" trope is definitely related to how the "personal" can be "political" in capitalist vs communist terms. Communism was about "sharing," the vague threat of foreign polyamory vs Western monogamy/individualism, about refusing to be "owned." From the "Bond" perspective, though, the "Bond girl" becomes another disposable product in his search for his own "enlightened self-interest" as part of *his* capitalist ideology, applied to human dynamics. The irony of that arrangement has always been that, because they each encode and decode the underlying meaning differently, each party believes *they're* converting the *other* one.
 
A dozen years ago Google's motto used to be "Don't be evil." It's almost impossible to remember days like that *today*. We often trust corporations, until we don't
 
When you're reading a fantasy story or playing D&D or Zelda and it's time to go to the "church" in the game to save or get healed or whatever the church does, it suddenly becomes totally possible to imagine a "church" that *is* the version of it they brought us up to believe was true. Even knowing the Church wasn't like that in real life, these "fantasy churches" become like a little mental haven from the harshness of the real world, extending the fantasy. I can picture how your science-fiction "soft capitalism" could function in a similar fashion for some people.
 
I think often conservatives can't tell the difference between fiction and reality, and that's a *central* breaking point in their way of thinking about the world
 
The thing with how Starlink affected the Ukraine/Russia war because of Elon's stupidity is a perfect example of corporations trying to have more power than governments, but he *is* getting sued over it for what it's worth
Capitalism trains both the customer and the boss to be impatient to the worker. The worker is expected to always do everything as fast as possible. It's seen as "more efficient" but like, a lot of the time, it doesn't take the point of diminishing returns into account.
 
That's why the Western mind is so unprepared to encounter actual Yoga. The idea that taking the longest possible amount of time to do something is the best way to do it is just *incomprehensible* to us. We're not *prepared* for it, in some way, you know?
 
In Undertale there's a race between four snails and you can make bets with others about which snail is going to win
"It may be the warriors who get the glory, but it's the engineers who build societies." (B'elanna Torres, Voyager 7.10 Flesh And Blood)
 
I'm also curious about the role of taxes and unions in a system like this, if any
 
Did I ever talk to you about Brooklyn Nine Nine?
 
There's a "vaporwave" element to the show you could say in a similar way. It's made by progressives to imagine what a squad of actual good cops would look like. It's a dramedy, slightly more comedic than dramatic, but it was smartly made for what it was. Their leader is a gay black man named Holt. They were trying to dare cops to live up to it in a way. Eventually, they canceled the show because they were worried it'd be hijacked as copaganda - that cops would point to it and say "That's what we're like!" That it'd be used for reform instead of abolition. Cake used to love it. They had a pet named after the main character. It was a legit good show overall tbh.
 
I mean, to be fair, if corporations already had suitable worker's rights in place, unions would be *unnecessary*. That's one utopia option
 
The main character's gimmick was that he used to take things people said around him out of context then say "Name of your sex tape!" An early episode had him meet his childhood hero who wrote the cop novels that made him become a cop. Then he finds out the writer is a sexist, racist homophobe and ends up punching his lights out *himself*
 
Quark is an example in fact! He eventually promises to agree to all of his workers' demands - as long as they don't *form* a union XD
 
He maintains the letter of the law of capitalism by sacrificing its spirit
 
You know, if you make money with something you work on, I'm never going to like tell you you sold out or something, just so you know! You don’t need to worry about that, if you have been. The issue with capitalism is more how difficult it tends to make it to actually do so in practice!
 
Ooh, Jimmy James from News Radio would be a relevant figure to this conversation probably! He's very much an "idealized capitalist" character who's supposed to be better than any real rich guy would be. He justifies it with pseudo-capitalist ideology, but his immediate employees are like his family. They're utter fools but ultimately he'd do anything to protect them.
 
He buys all of his employees hats for Christmas because he's too disconnected from reality to realize that, from a rich guy, it's an insulting gift. So when he does, he buys them all cars
 
He has this whole speech about the importance of advertising - I should find it for you maybe :)
 
The rich invented racism because they were scared of the poor
 
One of my favorite movies, Ghost Dog, is about a black samurai who lives on a rooftop and uses carrier pigeons. If you stop and think about it, for the vast majority of human History, pigeons *were* humankind's chief telecommunications network. All the wars and treaties and trade we picture back then were all *unimaginable* without the carrier pigeon. They carried humankind of their *backs* for centuries, for thousands of years. First, what a powerful symbol that is for someone who *studies* communications (translation, linguistics, journalism, media analysis, and so on and so forth). Then, there's how cruelly pigeons were *abandoned* after all that. Their entire way of thinking and living and expecting and adapting *transformed* itself, mentally and physiologically, to respond to human demands for all this time. Suddenly we have "better" and we no longer need them, so they become "street trash," "rats with wings." Without them we wouldn't even *have* the cities they scavenge in. In Ghost Dog with the narrative connection of blackness it doubles as a reference to how America was built by black slaves which were then abandoned on the streets to fend for themselves. They'd been transformed for someone else's needs, then when those needs changed, their own needs suddenly no longer mattered. This can be extended to any labor or emotional connection that changes us for someone who takes it for granted, to the importance of *recognizing* that. The dove is "peace" and the raven is "death" but the pigeon is just *life*. The pigeon survives, against all odds - it remembers everything we owe it, walking down the street with its head bobbing. It was around when that statue was made to that guy, they saw him in action when he was alive. That's *why* they shit all over it.
 
With the arrival of AI there is another powerful symbol for the organic roots of something that's being replaced, the forgotten core that made something possible. If we are all "replaced" we will *all* become as the pigeons are. We should see them as the canary in the coal mine they were.
 
"You become responsible, forever, for what you have tamed."
 
 

spacewastrel: my fursuit head (Default)

“The hardest battle is to be nobody but yourself in a world that’s fighting harder every day to make us all like everybody else.”

 

What is, in fact, the difference between Ken and Ryu? Are they simply two sides of the same coin like Mario and Luigi are? In a way yes but, in another way, definitely not. On a surface level, they represent collaboration between East and West themselves. Their friendship partly symbolizes the reconciliation between the US and Japan after the “ancient battle” of World War 2. However, Ken and Ryu can also be read from a much wider angle than that.

In fact, Ryu and Ken represent two opposite but complementary aspects of the economic role of the creative life in human society. It’s a modern extension of the ancient balance between Daoism and Confucianism and of the Buddha’s quest for moderation between the extremes of asceticism and abundance. For one thing, it’s important to society for artists to be able to make a living from their art. Certain types of achievements are only accessible to us as a species by being able to rely on this kind of support without having to make one otherwise. For another, it’s just as important to art as a concept for it to be possible to practice it for what it is, without having to monetize it to justify its existence. Some anti-capitalist social truths could never be expressed if art always had to be subordinated to the demands of capital, and Van Gogh’s art is worth no less now for his poverty when he died.

Ken and Ryu trained together with their master as children. They were less different from each other back then, and they became very close to each other. As an adult, Ken returned to the US to marry Eliza. Ken earns his living in public in official martial arts tournaments, famous, beloved by the audience for his skill and charisma. Ken is the poster child for the modern quest for work/life balance. She seems to get along with him well enough, there’s no apparent tension between them – he treats her well, she wants for nothing. Back from a tournament, she pretends to attack him and he parries, kissing her as he laughs. “How’s my champion doing today?” He often wonders what happened to Ryu, who he hasn’t seen for a very long time now.

Ryu’s become some kind of minimalist, wandering purist who devoted his life to fighting for what it is, without an “ulterior motive” for it. His survival depends completely on his ability to win enough bets on his own fights to be able to meet his own basic needs. He is literally putting everything on the line in his quest for personal perfection. While people come from all over the world to fight Ken, it’s Ryu who wanders the world to meet other fighters himself. Bison is seeking to create an army of battle robots which he could program with the techniques of all the other fighters at his beck and call. The recent context of the attempts to replace artists with artificial intelligence definitely gives it a more immediate resonance. After all, if a martial artist can be replaced by a machine, any artist can...

Cammy’s brainwashing by Bison reminds us that those who seek to replace humans with machines often also seek to make humans themselves more robot-like. Already a stoic British soldier with a cross around her neck, her vulnerability to social conditioning is pushed all the way to its logical limits. Bruce Lee was already talking about the implications of replacing the authentic with the artificial through the symbol of Mr Han’s metal hand in Enter The Dragon.

The first of Ryu’s fights that we see one of Bison’s research robots film is against Sagat. Sagat went through the exact opposite of Neo from the Matrix, who merely had to press a button to ‘know kung fu.’ Sagat’s most powerful move – his Tiger Uppercut – he developed after this fateful shoryuken left him with his distinctive chest scar. Art isn’t just the application of a technical exercise but the expression of a lived experience. Transmuting the pain of defeat into determination to win is something that Bison’s automatic predictions models can never do. The process of it is intimately part of its result.

All the street fighters have heavily defined national traits except Bison, who always comes from ‘nowhere.’ Evil comes from nowhere in particular, it can come from anywhere, but it can never be superimposed on national boundaries. Bison is defined by his refusal to understand the complexity of his opponents, by his desire to reduce them to their simplest expression, to what he’s willing to accept coming from them. He wants to make them adapt to him, not adapt to them. Despite its comedic exaggerations, Street Fighter ultimately does celebrate the way all those little bells and whistles make us distinct from each other, in its own way.

When Bison first approaches Ken to capture him, Ken is driving his car on the road between two tournaments. Ken’s brainwashing becomes like an actualization of his underlying fear of having “sold out to the system.” Ryu doesn’t drive, he always seems to be walking and, when one of Bison’s people comes at him in a car, Ryu knocks him out with a flying kick right through his windshield. Ryu doesn’t rely on any external structure to guide his life and rejects materialism completely. Even the well-known bonus stage from the game is about destroying a car.

When Ryu finds Honda fighting Dhalsim, he probably sees himself reflected in Dhalsim’s ascetic minimalism. Honda bonds with Ryu because they’re both Japanese himself, since he still thinks in national terms. Honda’s sumo is about spectacle, not self-deprivation, which makes him closer to the missing ‘half’ of the pair that Ken represented than Ryu. Honda’s wrestling moves represent external pressure, which Dhalsim escapes and resists because he is inwardly flexible. This is the context in which Dhalsim’s questioning of the role of violence even to help the poor from his village takes place.

When Ken compares T Hawk to Ryu however, T Hawk is not flattered at all but rather insulted. Ryu is not rich nor famous, he’s a reclusive homeless wanderer and T Hawk represents the fear of not being seen as having succeeded, no matter what one’s actual value. Comparatively, the first thing we hear about Fei Long – which brings us back to Bruce Lee – his producer is looking for him on his movie set but can’t find him anywhere. He vanished to have a real match against Ryu. Even having dedicated his life to movies, Fei Long still puts reality ahead of fiction, authenticity before artifice. They accept that getting hurt is part of the game, become friends, and even exchange info about Bison. The historical rivalry between the Japanese and the Chinese also makes their friendship noteworthy.

When Zangief fights Blanka for Bison, he stands for the “civilizing” arrogance of humankind having set itself against the natural world. One of them comes from an empire (Russia) while the other from a colony (Brazil), hot VS cold. Blanka is like a dog who runs simply because he enjoys running, and Zangief’s “social” motivation to fight is alien to him. Like Dhalsim’s yoga, Blanka’s capoeira situates him as escaping the external pressure of Zangief’s sambo through his inner flexibility. The collectivism implied by Zangief’s communism is the exact opposite of Blanka’s “wild” individualism.

There are of course at least five different versions of Street Fighter characters the details of whose specific characteristics vary from one version to another. There’s the game itself, the “live action” version with Van Damme, the “live action” series with Chun Li, the animated series, and the animated movie which I’m using as my main source for this. In the American movie, Zangief is more noble but less smart and Bison uses his principles against him to make him work for free. Bison definitely pays DeeJay in the American movie – unlike the DJs at furry cons, unfortunately.

In the animated Japanese movie, DeeJay is a good guy from the start, who Chun Li and Guile warn about Bison. It’s been said that “Without music, life would be a mistake.” DeeJay kicks one of Bison’s robots’ heads off who is wearing a shirt that says “Jesus” on it. DeeJay is another “inimitable artist” whose music acts as a “bearer of meaning.” He stands in contrast with the robot who acts as a “remover of meaning,” who dances without hearing the music. Bison’s robot is the “Pharisee,” an “artificial believer” of organized religion who repeats movements “mechanically,” without impulse or understanding. Street Fighter definitely has more of a mystical, punk, anarchist vibe to it, despite a soldier like Guile and a cop like Chun Li. It may not reject social structures outright, but it doesn’t fully trust them either. Characters like the Italian fascist Rolento are not there to endear us to militarism.

The fight between Chun Li and Vega showcases that the logic of domination which shapes the worldview of Bison and his cronies extends as far as its aggressive nature allows. Again, a fighter from a colonizing nation (Spain) is set against a fighter from a country that was deeply wronged by Western criminals (China). Being a matador, Vega sees Chun Li herself as a “piece of meat.” He fancies himself as the human who gets to exploit “animals” for fun just the way that Zangief’s fight against Blanka was used to mean earlier. Chun Li isn’t only avenging her father when she throws Vega out the window: she is refusing his entire categorization of her existence. Her victory poses in the game matter: the “fierce” pose and the “joyous” pose, the very traits that Bison sought to rob from her. It’s the most “film noir” fight in the film, with no supernatural bells and whistles to soften the blow. Guile doesn’t fight Vega for Chun Li but acts as a caretaker for her, by taking her to the hospital to recover.

Guile’s army eventually finds Bison’s base hidden behind Buddha’s face carved into a mountain, which they blow up with missiles. This is partly based on real historical facts because a real paramilitary group was once destroyed hiding behind a Buddha face in Southeast Asia. They say that “If you meet the Buddha on the road, kill him.” There’s an echo of DeeJay kicking off the Jesus robot’s head as well. False spirituality only exists to mask the desire to flatten and control others without seeking to understand them. Guile fails in the animated Japanese version exactly where Mr. Van Damme succeeds in the live American version. Guile may be better than the average soldier as a person, but the military-industrial complex can’t truly solve the problem posed by Bison’s Evil. It takes Ryu and Ken’s combined forces working together to save each other from Bison’s psychic attack to finally bring him down.

Most street fighters don’t dress like normal people but, no matter how weird they may look, after seeing them in action, you definitely wouldn’t make fun of how they look to their face. I think this is intentional. Sometimes we should be willing to defend our most unconventional choices, especially when there are so many other ways in which society does not give us a choice. Ryu is like Chuang Tzu’s “naked artist” who must isolate himself from society and its conditioning to express his real inner truth. We see the crowd chanting Ken’s name at tournaments interspersed with Ryu climbing a mountain to train alone without being disturbed by anyone. When they test their skills against each other, they’re measuring their progress in terms of their different life choices.

I found Ryu’s obsession with martial arts limiting as a child. Shouldn’t there be more to life than this? Now as an adult, I see Ryu as severely neurodivergent, unable to interact with others unless it’s through his special interest. The fact that Ryu “forgets” to stay in touch with Ken after their training is like the siren song of hyperfixation, that makes you forget the very existence of the world around you. It’s not that he doesn’t want to “know” others as such but it’s as though he thought that fighting them was the best way for him to get to know them. Ryu represents both “dance like no one’s watching” but also “ethics are what you do when no one is looking.” Ryu is like an introverted friend who finds his extroverted friend Ken near the end to finally realize that maybe, just maybe, he has been alone for too long at the time, and it really is good to see his friend again after all. Sometimes you need a reminder!

We don’t know much about their past before their training, but it’s clear they had little to turn to other than each other and their master, like a small chosen family. “Karate” is literally the “path of emptiness,” and Ryu’s “zen” tendencies are reflected in his meditation theme: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hBZ8k93qRwY. Ken’s theme, however, reflects his emotional turmoil, as though two people were each pulling on both of his arms in their own direction: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-14W5XTqL5U. His stage is, significantly, in front of a boat by the side of ocean, where people are reuniting and separating – the very ocean between the US and Japan. Many of us agnostics, polyamorous, non-binary bisexuals can sympathize with Ken’s attempt to be “too many things at the same time,” to live as a walker-between-worlds out of sincere attachment. The idea of Eliza leaving Ken in Street Fighter 6 completely changes his symbolic balance with Ryu.

Raul Julia’s decision to play Bison for his son despite the warning of critics inscribes itself in this dynamic: it’s his own answer to the question that Street Fighter is really asking in the first place. We don’t always create art to become famous for the ages – sometimes we do it just to make our loved ones smile, while we still can...

spacewastrel: my fursuit head (Default)
I forgot I made this! :O

Profile

spacewastrel: my fursuit head (Default)
spacewastrel

December 2025

S M T W T F S
 123 456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031   

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Nov. 12th, 2026 09:25 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios