Got anything resembling evidence for this statement? I don't mean "My organization says it, so it must be so." I mean something that a scholar would regard with something besides politely-concealed scorn. I can think of plenty of martial arts which were always competitive. Others were military training which, arguably, is a lifestyle while one is a soldier. Plenty of others were just something people did for self defense, fun, prize-fighting or because duelling was a local custom.
And what precisely do you mean by "a way of life"? Do you mean that the students lived in barracks at the martial arts school? Did they only marry within the style? Was it how they made a living? Was their boxing club also the site of their religious temple or the focus of their political affiliation? Was the boxing, wrestling or fencing coach their rabbi or their tribal chieftan who dictated every part of their lives?
Fighting has always been something people did. So has practicing and learning about it. If something is a recognized part of life it does not follow that it provides the mold into which the rest of life must fit.
There's a metric buttload of unexamined assumptions here. And you still haven't come close to answering my first question.
Martial arts has always had a large sports component. Even duelling is often a sport, a dangerous one, but a competition nonetheless. The same people who like to fight - primarily young men with more testosterone than myelin - like to compete for status, money and (ultimately) breeding rights. The whole "philosophy" and "way of life" thing is something added. Sometimes it's a way of keeping the young bucks from getting into stupid fights and burning down the neighborhood. Sometimes it's a way of training warriors so that they can do the terrible things their life forces on them without turning completely psychotic. For a very, very small few it's part of religious devotion in regular life or monastic communities.
Which sort are you speaking about? Or are you referring to something else entirely. So far you've invoked the symbols "respect", "honor", "tradition" and "way of life" without giving adding even a drop of new information. Please don't stoop to saying that I don't understand or haven't been initiated into a "true" martial art. I can guarantee that I have and swallowed all the stuff you're reciting for years.
I don't look down on it. I just don't see the point. What I do see is an attempt to pull a fast one on the students. By associating patriotism and the school the teacher is implicitly making associating the two. The boxing club gets mixed up with nation or, worse, religion. The student learns to treat the two with the same degree of regard and loyalty. This is not entirely honest, and it places a glorified gym on the same level as one's country or faith.
It's also strictly speaking against the law at least in the United States. There is a legal standard for flag etiquette which does not include wearing the flag on one's sports clothes any more than it would include wearing it on one's jockstrap. I would not presume to do either. If the flag is to be displayed in a club or business it shows disrespect to do it other than in the nation's approved fashion.
I'm not buying the "you do not understand respect" ploy here. I understand exactly what is being done. I just recognize that some of it is worthwhile and some of it is not. And some of the "not' is actively wrong.
I absolutely respect the people who taught me. By extension I have high regard for many of the people who taught them. I take what I do seriously. It is important to me personally because of the time and effort I put into it, a process which extends into other parts of life like any other practice treated the same way. That in no way means that I must agree that martial arts is inherently different than any other activity and should be judged by a different standard.
BTW, that's advice I could give myself every day of my life, so thanks for the opportunity to remind myself of that.
