This week we have an epic Full Audiobook ‘Emotional Intelligence’ by Daniel Goleman.
This is a tremendous listen, take your time, it is full of excellent nuggets of information that will inform how you train and how you train others.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWbUUUBIGN4
https://miravselfdefense.com/product/the-working-womans-express-self-defense-course/
In this succinct guide for women with little, if any, self-defense experience, dynamic trainer Mirav Tarkka, a former Sergeant in the Israeli Army, covers all the key points for survival in the concrete jungle, from mental attitudes to martial pressure points.
Israeli-born Mirav is a world-renowned self-defense expert, specializing in Krav Maga (Israeli Contact Combat). With over seventeen years of experience as a trainer, Mirav founded Defense Tactics™ (International Combat Training) and Recharge™ (Alternative Functional Fitness) and has now set a goal to inspire, train and help empower individuals and groups at all levels, focusing on the mindset and mental training (as well as the physical aspect) and creating online courses especially for women all around the world, regardless of their physical abilities, age or culture.
Mirav studied, trained and served with the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) at the Wingate Institute (Israel), then completed and instructed many international training courses. She holds university degrees in Psychology and Criminology and a diploma in Physical Education. With appearances on television, features in magazines and newspapers throughout Europe, Mirav is often invited to demonstrate her work at many international workshops and seminars covering self-defense related topics.
Recently Mirav became a mother of two and says:
“Having my daughters has emphasized even more, for me, how important my role in life is. I need to be able to protect them, at all times, I can’t trust anyone to do that ‘for me’. I need to be strong, extra-assertive, powerful, to be capable of defending them and myself, and to set an example of the independent women I want them both to be. The love of a mother for her children is the greatest force that exists – that is my underlying drive and that will be what protects them, combined with my knowledge and experience. I would truly wish for all women in the world (and men) to realize their true power, whether they are mothers or not, their true responsibility to themselves and their loved ones, and to take full control of their lives. No one should have power over you.”
Summer is upon us, and we find ourselves spending more time with our kids, families, and loved ones outside of work. In the United States, thousands of us will attend large events, such as concerts, air shows, festivals, sports games, and outside gatherings. This is what we do, it’s who we are, and it’s the season we do it. Given the recent spate of terroristic attacks and violent incidents in the West, there is a threat environment we should also be considering and concerning ourselves with. We are now seeing more attacks conducted by person(s) simply utilizing a large vehicle to drive over people in crowded streets and mass gatherings.
These low-tech attacks are not only deadly, but hard to identify beforehand. They do not require a lot of training and can be carried out with common and everyday equipment or tools, such as vehicles or knives. The use of knives is becoming more common in conjunction with vehicular attacks. Knives, unlike guns, are easily accessible, do not require ammunition, do not need to be reloaded, and never jam. However, they are only effective at close range, and this type of attack requires a good amount of effort.
Vehicles are easy to come by as well. They don’t typically require a background check and there is always someone selling one for cash on Craigslist — no questions asked. But most importantly, they do not bring unwanted attention to us. They blend in with the other thousand vehicles on the road. A vehicle can be a means for transportation one day, and a deadly weapon the next, depending on who the operator is and what their intent is. The use of vehicles to kill civilians is not only explained, but it’s highly encouraged in terrorist propaganda such as Dabiq and Inspire magazine (Al Qaeda & ISIS publications).
What does that mean for us, and what are we supposed to watch out for? Well, I would venture to say this: These attacks are not just “attacks.” They should be looked at as “plots and attacks.” Every single one of them has been plotted out before it was carried out. Even if it was down to the last minute before the attacker made his/her decision to go forward with it. I consider the hour leading up to the attack still in the “plotting” phase. The attacker may have to conduct one more surveillance run to see if security has increased or decreased at their target. Maybe certain roads have been blocked or changed.
There are a multitude of reasons for him/her to change the plan up until the final moments. If you are already at one of these events, the plotting phase will be one of the few moments to spot someone out of place. Someone fidgeting, sweating, mumbling to themselves, or saying prayers in a low tone. Look for individuals carrying large bags that seem out of place, or long jackets or outerwear that is not seasonally normal.
What about vehicular attacks? These are becoming more common, as I said, so what’s our defense plan? If we look at the Nice and two London bridge attacks, we notice that all three vehicles were lorries (the equivalent to a medium size U-Haul truck). These trucks are not the most quick or agile vehicles; they are top heavy and have a poor turning radius. But if they have some weight in them, gain speed, and there is not much between you and them — your options are limited. In all three attacks, all three lorries drove in a zig zag pattern to cover as much ground and accumulate the most kills as possible, making it difficult for the victims to avoid being injured.
Removing yourself from the line of attack is of the utmost importance. Look for a “door.” During a threat protection course in 2014, we were taught to always look for avenues of escape and evasion. These areas are called “doors.” The term “doors” refers to a defining point of escape or evasion that would make it very difficult for a threat to follow you. This concept was taught to us as an anti-ambush/anti-kidnap defense method, but the context is still relevant even if it’s a terrorist attack. Movement is paramount here. Run towards the strongest object if possible: barriers, walls, bollards, parked cars. Get something in between you and the attack. Running into stores and restaurants is great, but just remember, if the driver wants to follow you there is a good chance the truck can make it through the front with the force and weight behind it. Small alleyways or areas that vehicles cannot make it through are all doors. “For more tips and ideas, look for my second article in this series about situational awareness and trusting your gut.
Michael served in the United States Marine Corps and is a veteran of the Iraq war. After leaving the Marines he worked in Gavin DeBecker’s firm has an executive protection agent. After many years service, Michael branched out and created his own company, and currently serves as Executive Manager of Security in a large Texas based firm.
General James Mattis (Ret.) served in the United States Marine Corps from 1969 to 2013. During this time he was the 11th Commander of United States Central Command. We sat down with him and asked him your questions.
The Monkey Dance is a term coined by Rory Miller in his model of violence dynamics. Rory describes a Monkey Dance as a type of social violence where two people, usually men, engage in a ritual confrontation to establish dominance and social status. One of hallmarks of the Monkey Dance is the influence of the Monkey Brain. Both Rory Miller and Marc MacYoung have written extensively about the workings of Monkey Brain as part of their work on Conflict Communications.
The vocal portion of the Monkey Dance is a subset of this behavior. Whereas, the Monkey Dance many times climaxes in a fight, a purely vocal Monkey Dance does not. It has the majority of the elements of the full Monkey Dance. It is inherently social in nature. The behaviors are driven by the Monkey Brain. An audience is usually involved. But there is one significant difference. The participants don’t intend to cross the line from verbal into physical.
A vocal Monkey Dance between two or more parties can be viewed as a Monkey Dance that didn’t quite make it to the fighting Monkey Dance stage. In many cases, the parties involved don’t really have any intention of actually fighting. They are posturing and pretending to be preparing to fight. But the Verbal Monkey Dancer is something else. This person has no intention of fighting in the first place. He or she isn’t posturing for a fight. He or she is certain that he/she will not be physically responded to regardless of his or her abusive behavior.
Unlike Monkey Dancers that are in the vocalizing stage, the Verbal Monkey Dancer, doesn’t expect a physical response to his/her actions regardless of his/her outrageous behavior.
The reason that this person can get away with these actions is that he or she is a member of some type of protected class where the use of physical force against him/her would be considered unacceptable by society. Some examples of protected classes are: women, the young, the elderly, and people with disabilities. High status individuals can also be Verbal Monkey Dancers. It is as if the person has an invisible protective societal shield. The Verbal Monkey Dancer knows that it is unlikely that the subject of his/her violent behavior will respond physically. Therefore, he/she feels free to unleash both verbal and physical abuse.
It is important to note that while people in some protected classes are frequently targeted and victimized by Predators because they are considered easy victims, not all members of these classes are only prey. The Verbal Monkey Dancer has recognized how to use his or her social status to prey upon other people through his/her bad behavior. This person is able to identify people who are unlikely to physically attack him or her regardless of what he/she does. In some ways, some Verbal Monkey Dancers chose their physically stronger victims in the same way that a Predator chooses physically weaker victims.
The Verbal Monkey Dancer knows that in certain situations, the greater the perceived physical advantage of his/her victims, the less likely they will respond with violence. Other Verbal Monkey Dancers will choose victims that are inherently passive in nature and thus unlikely to respond violently. High Status Verbal Monkey Dancers uses the power of their social status to intimidate their victims. In either case, the Verbal Monkey Dancer is selective in his/her victim selection. Neither the Predator nor the Verbal Monkey Dancer wants to encounter a target that physically fights back.
There is also a type of Verbal Monkey Dancer that doesn’t depend upon the shield of society for protection. This person feels protected by some type of barrier that they feel keeps them safe. Imagine a person, yelling at others while standing safely behind a fence. Or a car driver spewing abuse at someone on the sidewalk knowing that he can easily speed away.
Frequently, the Verbal Monkey Dancer will act alone. But there are instances where Verbal Monkey Dancers get together an act in groups. The group behavior follows the same pattern as previously described.
In the case of a Verbal Monkey Dancer, his or her Monkey Brain is fully engaged. He or she may be outraged by some event or belief that aroused his/her limbic system to seek revenge or venting. Regardless of his/her specific motivation it is important to recognize the behavior pattern of a Verbal Monkey Dancer. A skilled Verbal Monkey Dancer must be handled with care. He or she knows how to work the system to his/her advantage. He or she knows how much she/he can get away with and not provoke a physical response. And if he or she does provoke a physical response, he/she knows how to use her social status to punish her victim further.
In the age of the weaponization of mobile phones and social media, sometimes the safest defense against Verbal Monkey Dancers is to record their bad behavior as evidence of their abuse.
Beware of the Verbal Monkey Dancer!
The subject of women and self defence has been a popular topic in recent months following a small number of incidents in the city where I live. In response the Academy of Self Defence, where I am a senior instructor, have provided free seminars followed by the offer of structured classes, after which I am always left asking myself the same question with increasing frustration.
What the hell is it that woman want from self defence training, do they even want to train?
My father was keen for his children to learn martial arts but it was actually his first grandson who eventually showed an interest. I didn’t feel the need until I reached my mid-thirties. That stemmed from an altercation whist driving with my then nine month old son asleep in the back of the car. Now whilst I was quick to hit the hijack locks it made me realise I needed something more to protect my valuable cargo on a daily basis no matter what, when or where.
My first attempt was to accompany a work colleague to a kick boxing class where the instructor simply allowed his teenage pupils to freely kick us in the head. Thankfully that knocked some sense in to me and I sought the wisdom of my father who directed me to the very same club he had taken my nephew to all those years ago. I was greeted by a shaven headed chap dressed head to toe in a bright red Gi (ringing any bells Garry?). The class was a good mix of male & female students (tick). There were separate male/female changing areas (tick). There was even another new starter, albeit a man, who is still one of my regular training partners today and my dogs vet! I won’t lie it was a daunting experience and I’ll let you into a secret, I did take my father with me like the typical daddy’s girl that I am.
Not everyone is as fortunate to find a legit dojo like me, filled with the fantastic people who after all these years I can honestly call my friends…you all know who you are. I am now a third dan black belt and senior instructor, my son is a junior black belt and junior instructor. The club I joined has transformed over the years for the better.
So you might be thinking I know what women want, but I don’t. I was lucky, determined (I bought a Gi on my second lesson) and that way minded…I have two older brothers who I used to play fight with which explains a lot in my book. Garry and I receive numerous queries from women who want self defence training. We take part in radio shows, provide free seminars in response to actual attacks on local women and organise mini courses to suit.
These efforts generate a lot of interest, but the promises of attendance soon turn to excuses and cancellations as the day draws near. That passion and drive I felt attending my first lesson isn’t there. Does this mean it takes a particular type of woman or mind set? I wonder if they would only give it a go they could see the physical and mental benefits this type of training has to offer. It could realistically save a life where else can you get that kind of experience?
Many women sit for hours in a gym in spinning classes, but you can’t spin an attacker though I suppose you could throw the bike at him were it not bolted down. Are women so preoccupied with high energy routines they think will result in a quick weight loss they don’t consider the long term benefits of a martial art or self defence training?
Or is it that they simply want the silver bullet of self defence delivered in a single one hour session (could you make it half an hour) at a convenient time of day, for free, oh and I don’t want to do anything too physical. I’m being sarcastic but it’s how I feel sometimes when faced with this dilemma. So in my quest for some kind of understanding into the minds of women I am going to reach out to a random group of women on the interweb and I’ll get back to you.
Oh and in case you were wondering whether I would have changed anything about the day that brought me to training in the first place, my answer is no, not a thing. I only wish I’d turned up twenty years earlier but at least my father got his wish, he now has three black belts in the family.
Jayne is a director of CRGI, a 3rd dan black belt in Ju Jitsu and a Senior Instructor teaching Ju Jitsu and self defence classes at the Academy of Self Defence.
www.academyofselfdefence.co.uk
Complex ideas and situations can be simplified into manageable chunks with the aid of models, and violent crime is no different. One such model, known as the Crime Triangle, has gone through various iterations in criminology circles and filtered down in its various versions through law enforcement as well.
In a more mature form of the model, we see that crime is a positive interplay of three core components combined with a negative, or lack, of three corresponding components:
A violent crime happens when a (1) motivated offender and (2) attractive target converge within a (3) suitable location, in the absence of corresponding capable controllers.1
If any one of these components does not form part of the core structure of the Triangle, then the crime does not happen. This seems almost tautological at first, as though it doesn’t say anything that isn’t self-evident. “A bad guy and a good guy meet in a place with nobody to intervene. How revolutionary.” And yet I would argue that it is deceptively simple, and understanding these core components of the model can be very helpful in organizing your own self defense training, as well as guiding further research.
The world is a complex adaptive system, as is the violence that takes place within it, and one aspect of these more chaotic systems is that small changes in initial conditions can have drastic effects later on. Jeff Goldblum’s character discussed this phenomenon in Jurassic Park, for anyone that remembers that stellar scene of nerd knowledge being dropped. Small changes in these core components of the Crime Triangle can result in radically different understandings of a violent event and how it occurs.
Simple, Not Simplistic
Originally, the Crime Triangle only referred to third parties that could intervene specifically on behalf of the victim and stop the crime as “capable guardians.” Eventually, all third parties during a violent event were referred to collectively as “controllers,” that were then subdivided based on what they controlled. The controller that can intervene on behalf of the victim, for instance, is referred to as a “guardian.” The seemingly innocuous addition of the word “capable” to the concept of controllers has very large implications on the ground.2
This is because whether a guardian is present is not enough, since a guardian may not be “capable” in the sense of being able or willing to intervene. Your loved one such as your wife or grandmother is a potential guardian, but are they capable? Any lack in presence or capability is something that must be compensated for with any number of means, whether communication methods such as a phone and a predetermined plan of action, or possibly a legally possessed weapon.
A handler, or the controller with a connection to the offender, may only be as capable as he or she is willing to stop the violence; some may actually encourage it. There is a large amount of research on how the presence of third parties connected to the attacker can affect a violent act, but how many instructors have seriously looked into it? The Triangle can help identify this deficiency.
Going further, territoriality and the sense of ownership or personal investment that a controller has in getting involved to stop the altercation can depend on whether the property is public or privately owned, the ability of the neighborhood to assert their territoriality over criminals, etc. A place manager such as a cashier in a large chain store is often less likely to risk her neck personally by intervening in an attempted assault in front of the store. The place manager in this large store has no personal investment, and this isn’t even her neighborhood, so why get involved? Why not call the cops instead? This delay can have lethal consequences for you.
The idea of a “motivated offender” was developed as opposed to a likely offender in the original triangle, since it was recognized that the mere presence of a criminal wasn’t enough for a crime to happen, even if the offender was a career criminal. One could hypothetically place a couple people next to each other and wait for the magic to happen, but that wouldn’t ensure that violence emerges.
There needed to be a triggering template involving how attractive the victim was from a vulnerability standpoint as well as other factors such as external “precipitators.” This is a list of up to 16 types of triggers ranging from arousal-stimulating sensory situations such as that found in the club with loud noises and crowding, to more personal ones in the form of a provocation or insult.3
When one considers how such a small change in the wording used by a model can have such large effects on how we look at the way violence happens, hopefully it is easier to appreciate how a precise yet simple model does not automatically mean simplistic. If your own model of examining violence can be haphazardly changed without any noticeable effect, than you haven’t identified the most fundamental elements for your model.
Applying the Model
To give a practical example of approaching your own self defense training in light of the Triangle, consider body language. Many instructors are rightfully starting to incorporate nonverbal aspects such as anxiety cues to detect potentially violent behavior prior to an attack. This fits the mantra of “awareness” that many self defense systems preach.
This is all well and good, but if we take the simple concepts of the Crime Triangle, it becomes clear that simple “awareness” is insufficient. Awareness of what? Many approaches are heavily threat-focused, and yet this misses a large chunk of the necessary components. You may find yourself in the position of recognizing a threat, and yet what if you are in a neighborhood where not only will nobody intervene, but some may actively join in the attack? Looking into the crystal ball only to see your own inevitable ass-kicking isn’t exactly going to inspire confidence in your method.
A more structured approach to nonverbal cues would look at reading the crowd through expanded eyes. Who are the controllers of a situation? Is their posture dominant or submissive? If they do get involved are they physically capable of altering the outcome or would it be better to verbally instruct them to get help? Is the potential threat’s handler actively engaged or is his body language disengaged from the offender’s attempted action toward you?
Who are the players on the chessboard, and what are their roles?
This is just one example of using the Triangle to assess your training in the area of body language, but there are many more. What I would suggest is to take this simple model, perhaps even develop one of your own, and start brainstorming and critiquing your own approach to self defense. Have you thought of all the angles? You may be surprised by what you discover.
1 Marie Tillyer and John Eck, “ Getting a handle on crime: A further extension of routine activities theory,” Security Journal 24, no. 2, (June 2010): 179–193, accessed July 2, 2017, doi: 10.1057/sj.2010.2.
2 For an in-depth discussion of how different variations in wording affected research, see Marcus Felson, “Routine Activity Approach,” in Environmental Criminology and Crime Analysis, ed. Richard Wortley and Lorraine Mazerolle (Portland: Willan Publishing, 2008), 70-77.
3 Richard Wortley, “Situational Precipitators of Crime,” ibid., 48-69.
Nathan Wagar is the founder of Borderland Strategic Performance Institute. He served two combat deployments to northern Iraq with the U.S. Army’s 101st Airborne, as part of a task force formed for kill or capture raids of high value targets.
He currently coaches boxing and personal protection to civilians in New Mexico, as well as closed course CQB and active shooter programs to the US Secret Service assigned to the Albuquerque field department.
www.borderlandstrategic.com
The Different Mindset between Social Work and Self-Defense.
Clinicians and self-defense practitioners have a very different mind frame and changing between the two can be difficult without training and real world experience. Most individuals in the helping professions have a mind frame of providing assistance in different forms. Whether it is therapy, substance use, case management, or meeting basic needs, the idea is that people are inherently good and we can help and because of that, we are safe. This leads to two false beliefs: the person served will respect and reflect the work that the clinician is trying to do and that the clinician will most likely not be assaulted. They may be “difficult” or “resistant to treatment” but engaging nonetheless. An example of this is the clinician working in an area known to have gang activity engaging on their own terms (i.e. in gang neighborhoods). The assumption is that the clinician is safe because they are trying to help. This can be a big mistake.
The self-defense practitioner has a different frame of mind. He, or she, understands and knows, sometimes too well, of the issues facing us today and is training to face it. It may not be the best training, or the most realistic, but it is something. In an assault, some individuals freeze, the best advice is to do something, anything. If you’ve been training, hopefully it will come out when you need it most.
I’m not saying that clinicians or substance abuse counselors are not aware, it’s quite the contrary with multiple systems in place. When doing outreach they go out in pairs, when doing home visits, they are available via phone, and when in clinics they have methods for addressing emergencies. Clinicians know to be aware of their surroundings and assess for safety. But many times, clinicians do not trust their gut or are told to continue working with an individual even after voicing their concerns. Recently, I expressed concern when working with an ex-convict with PTSD who was sweating and becoming increasingly agitated mid-session. When discussing his anger and my safety concerns, I was told that they could be “intimidating” and to continue my work. My work did not continue as he was arrested less than a week later.
At this point I want to address therapeutic counseling and the inherent potential danger and why I, and others, do what we do. We are here to help in any way, shape, or form. We believe that humans, by nature, are good, and that sometimes people express emotions in different ways and sometimes in violent ways. However, these instances are slim, but very real. According to mentalhealth.gov, most people with mental health issues are more likely to be victims than aggressors and that is why we need to do what we do.
This brings us to the crux of the topic. What is the difference and what are the concerns? Why does clinical work not mix with self-defense? One reasons can be illustrated in a training of skills to use when physical aggression occurs. The instructor says, “How many of you have taken self-defense or martial arts classes?” A few people raise their hands. “Okay, that’s good, but this is different. We don’t fight back.” What I am about to write is going to anger many, but to write it simply: fight back! I do not care how good you are at blocking, or getting out of the way or trying to remove yourself from the situation. Something is going to fail and your life is now at risk. I would rather be alive and lose my job than to lose my life or end up in the hospital. These situations are made even worse when you have no training or have training that provides a false sense of security.
My last point comes from a situation I had a few years ago. I was working as a street outreach worker. I came back to our hub/program to do documentation and any other tasks. A young adult present asked me about studying psychology at a local community college. Naturally, I engaged her in conversation. While talking, a homeless youth runs out the door, stating that he is late for work. He comes back in the building, gets a drink of water, and pulls a knife. Why he did this, I do not know. Was he trying to prove something? Intimidation? Maybe he was happy that he had a knife? Or needed it for protection in a shelter? We will never know, mainly because I don’t remember what happened next. All I know is that I got that knife in my hands. I may have blacked out.
My point is this: all of your trainings and understanding on why people hurt or why they express themselves through violence goes out the window when facing a life or death situation. Compassion or empathy will not save you. Your primate and mammalian brain is likely to shut down. Your survival drive takes over, and hopefully what training you have kicks in. Even if I had a knife, a gun or any tactical gear, it would not have helped. I was at the mercy of this individual. Sometimes weapons do not help (a subject for another article), but your training does. My brain went from clinical work to self-preservation in an instant. Can other clinicians do the same? Can they shut off the need to help others and protect themselves? Can the clinician who brushed my arm at a training and profusely apologized for “assaulting” me do the same? I know that when I train, I have to shut off that caring aspect, such that some people either do not know or do not see how I could be a clinician.
We need to be able to make that switch from helping others to protecting ourselves. This means a shift in paradigms. We will continue to help, regardless of the situation, we will be there to celebrate when things are good and to help you when you fall. We will support you in your choices, even if we do not agree with them. But, also that we are realistic and ready for when things become unsafe.
I hope that I have not increased the stigma of mental illness in this article. I am painting with a small brush, capturing specific instances of aggression in my ten plus years. We need to address mental illness and substance abuse as we do with any physical illness. Mental illness and substance abuse is a serious concern with suicide being the 10th leading cause of death in the US.
Alan Jensen, MSW, LICSW
Take AIM at those love handles by giving this new KILLER workout your best SHOT! Tacticalisthenics helps TARGET body fat while improving a wide RANGE of skills! Forget those fitness MAGAZINES and set your SIGHTS on the ultimate in TACTICAL cardio training!
Learn more about Master Ken here: ameridote.com
“You can map out a fight plan or a life plan, but when the action starts, it may not go the way you’ve planned, and you’re down to your reflexes-that means your [preparation]. That’s where your roadwork shows. If you’ve cheated on that in the dark of the morning, well, you’re going to find that out now, under the bright lights.”-Joe Frazier
The great champion Joe Frazier is referring both to boxing and life in general, and his lesson is mighty powerful. Perhaps more powerful than he ever realized. I’m going to drive home just how powerful his advice is with an example from some horrifically evil people, but first, let’s take a sojourn through some Paleolithic anthropology and then a 16th-century observation on warfare before we bring it back to the 21-st century.
You are the weakest human being that has ever walked the planet since this species inception.
Don’t take that personally, I’m weak, too, and so is your neighbor, and your CrossFit coach down the road. The 21st century human is a pale copy of better versions of ourselves that colonized this planet up till about 10,000 years ago.
This weak estimation I have just rendered is not me talking-that’s the science.
“There is some evidence that the size of the average Sapiens brain has actually decreased since the age of foraging. Survival in that era required superb mental abilities from everyone. When agriculture and industry came along people could increasingly rely on the skills of others for survival, and new ‘niches for imbeciles’ were opened up. You could survive and pass your unremarkable genes to the next generation by working as a water carrier or an assembly-line worker.
“Foragers mastered not only the surrounding world of animals, plants and objects, but also the internal world of their own bodies and senses. They listened to the slightest movement in the grass to learn whether a snake might be lurking there. They carefully observed the foliage of trees in order to discover fruits, beehives and bird nests. They moved with a minimum of effort and noise, and knew how to sit, walk and run in the most agile and efficient manner. Varied and constant use of their bodies made them as fit as marathon runners. They had the physical dexterity that people today are unable to achieve even after years of practicing yoga or t’ai chi.”-Yuval Noah Harari Sapien: A Brief History of Humankind.
A little depressing, huh? Before we get too down on our weaker and dumber selves let’s not forget that we win when it comes to technological luxuries. But then again…
“Don’t talk about ‘progress’ in terms of longevity, safety, or comfort before comparing zoo animals to those in the wilderness.”-Nassim Nicholas Taleb
Your call if you dig the idea of being a domesticated animal.
You can strive to be either more like the wolf, or more like the golden retriever. Both fine animals, but…
The next stop on our journey, the16th-century Frenchman Michel Montaigne. Rather than quote from the lengthy section I have excised this idea, I will paraphrase in prose far less elegant than his.
Montaigne, while musing on warfare of the past up to his present-day remarks that each succeeding general or army would fare well or better than preceding champions.
For example, Alexander would easily dominate opposition that preceded him by a century, whereas Caesar coming after Alexander would handle Alexander and his armies easily, and that a French militia of Montaigne’s period would handle a legion of Caesar’s handily.
Nice, huh? Puts we gradually weaker humans back in the driver’s seat.
Not so fast.
Montaigne points out that these successive victories would only be possible because each succeeding army enjoys greater technology (i.e., better forged steel for Caesar vs. Alexander, early firearms for the French dragoons vs. Caesar). He then goes on to say that if we level the playing field by making each fighting force compete mano y mano, or with the preceding generations technology then the victory goes hands down to the earlier version of ourselves. Montaigne makes this assertion by observing that each generation of man seems to do less and less, and to be capable of less and less. Keep in mind he was making this observation in the 1500’s-I wonder what he would conclude after observing today’s texters, and tweeters, and gamers.
And now back to the 21st-century. I will quote from an exercise video available online. I will not provide a source for the video, I will not offer the name of the “instructor” as, well, because the video producers and instructors are scum.
The video is an outreach for potential ISIS converts on how to stay fit for battle.
I quote from the video: “This video is dedicated to the mujahedeen in Syria, and to others who plan on coming here.”
Our quite fit “instructor” then offers tips on how to get fit and stay fit for battle with no gym equipment. And, I will say, having been in this business for some time, his advice, unfortunately, is quite sound.
This video reminds us of the fact that the scum who perpetrated the atrocities in the offices of Charlie Hebdo and what followed, also met regularly for fitness sessions.
Which brings me to the point of this journey, what are we doing right now to be
Are we content to assume that our “protectors” somewhere out there in Washington, or wherever are the only preparation we need to make?
If we make this assumption how do we resolve this with the fact that most such attacks are not battlefield attacks, they are civilized world attacks-this puts us into Montaigne’s example where we have to ask ourselves how would we do against an enemy when we lack our technology which we use to bolster our weakness?
Would we be ready if we had to be ready?
Are we preparing to any degree whatsoever as Joe Frazier suggests versus a foe that takes such advice to heart?
We either makes ourselves weak, or we make ourselves strong. The amount of time dedicated to either is the same.
What are you going to do while some villain out there is doing what needs to be done?
Garry here, now please visit Mark’s website
http://www.extremeselfprotection.com
