The Relationship between Martial Arts and Politics I

My martial arts training in Soo Bahk Do Moo Duk Kwan has given me many physical benefits, but as I grow older I find that I have a deeper appreciation of the intellectual aspects of the martial art that I practice, and in particular the philosophical underpinnings of Soo Bahk Do. Indeed the ongoing strife and crisis in the United States, and around the globe reminded me of the importance of cyclical behavior in law, politics, and international relations. The nature of these of these cycles brought to mind the relationship between the Korean principles of Um and Yang, or the Chinese variant of the Yin and Yang as illustrated by the Taegeuk or the Tajitu. Grandmaster Hwang Kee, the founder of Soo Bahk Do Moo Duk Kwan school of martial arts averred in the Moo Do Chul Hahk published posthumously, that the active and passive elements of all cycles recognized and affirmed by occidental and oriental traditions alike are balanced by the presence of a neutral element. The purpose of this neutral force called "Do" is to regulate the cyclical processes and through its moderating, restraining influence inspire the unity between the active and passive elements necessary to give substance and form to the material world. At a cursory glance the active and passive elements seem to be in polar opposition to each other. However, a more intensive closer examination shows these two elemental principles are complementary in nature to the extent that neither principle would exist in the absence of the other. By that I mean to say that for one to exist the other must exist as well, Id: (Hwang, 2009, pp. 124-127). The political system in the United States provides an excellent example of these principles because, the raison d'être for the existence of both the Republican and Democratic parties are to provide alternatives to the other. Without the existence of one, there would be no need for their continued quiddity of it's opponent The American Republic, and its constitutional republican form of government were never intended to be; or to function as a single party nation state. Nor did the members of the Constitutional Convention intend for the Republic's constituent states and territories to become single party entities. The continued sustainability of the Republic depends on the continued viability of both major political parties because they balance each other out serving as a counterweight to check the excesses of the other. In terms of the American political system, it is logical to argue that the neutral force holding the two opposing yet complementary forces in check are the moderate independent centrists voters who do not readily identify with either of the major parties.