Synopsis: Jonathan Bluestein’s new book Research of Martial Arts is an ambitious book that discusses many important and difficult topics in more details than most martial arts books. In particular, it discusses and compares the external approach to martial arts (also known as external martial arts) and the internal approach to martial arts (also known as internal martial arts). It discusses various martial arts from the health perspective, physiological perspective, philosophical perspective, and the combat perspective. Of course for such an ambitious book, what Jonathan wrote is not necessarily the final word on the subject, but it is definitely a significant contribution to stimulate additional discussion on these important topics. To his credit, I believe that Jonathan also agrees with the previous statement, as he wrote in his Introduction: “This book was written to promote understanding – of martial arts, life and other human beings. It is through understanding that we grow. Still, it is only natural that many of you will have disagreements with some parts of my book, or with my personal opinions, and I wholeheartedly accept this reality. …”
Nevertheless, I think many people will learn some valuable information from this 418-page book.
About the book author: Jonathan Bluestein is a martial arts teacher and author from Israel who has studied a variety of martial arts. He is the founder of Tianjin Martial Arts Academy in Israel where he teaches the traditional Chinese martial arts Xing Yi Quan and Pigua Zhang.
Read More »
U.S. Needs Another Anson Burlingame
It seems that recently we read in the news almost on a weekly basis that the U.S. seems to be involved in some sort of serious turmoil or unrest in some part of the world. It may be in Iraq, Iran, Syria, Turkey, Egypt, Israel, Palestine, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, East China Sea, South China Sea, Ukraine, Okinawa, Somalia, Pakistan, Afghanistan, etc. It is true that some of these unrest were caused by other countries or parties who have very narrow partisan interest and treat others with extreme cruelty and without regard to the value of a human life. It is possible that some of these unrest were not caused by actions of the U.S., and the U.S. was just responding to try to protect the safety of her citizens and the interests of her country. At least that is the impression one gets from reading the U.S. press and listening to the words of our country’s political leaders.
However, if we probe deeper, the causes and effects are no longer so clear. For example, did the U.S.’s 2003 military ouster of President Saddam Hussein on the pretense of getting rid of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction help to trigger a lot of the upheavals in the greater Middle East region? Did the U.S.’s long-standing policy of containing/surrounding/weakening China and U.S.’s collusion with a revived-militaristic Japan that refuses to acknowledge WWII historical truths help to trigger the tensions in East Asia? Did the U.S.’s long, unequivocal, staunch support for Israel help to trigger almost 70 years of unrest in the Middle East? Even in Ukraine, didn’t the U.S. play an important role in overthrowing the legally elected former President Viktor Yanukovych and replaced him with the current pro-West President Petro Poroshenko have anything to do with Russia President Vladimir Putin’s actions in Ukraine? In other words, is the foreign policy of the U.S. in the long-term best interest of the U.S.? [1]
Perhaps the U.S. needs to reassess her foreign policy with an objective analysis and a new perspective of how does the rest of the world look at the U.S. Perhaps she should look back at more than 150 years ago on how Ambassador Anson Burlingame helped to reshape American foreign policy, first as the U.S.’s Ambassador to China 1861-1867 and then as China’s “Ambassador to All the Treaty Powers (including the U.S.)” 1867-1870. [2]
Read More »