Note: This is an unlocked LMA module. If you want access to the rest of Liberation Martial Arts, upgrade your account. We send out learning modules almost daily. If you're no longer getting LMA updates, your payment information may no longer be up to date. Click on the table of contents above to see if you have access to LMA.
Introduction
The sapling games are the foundation of Liberation Martial Arts (LMA) games. From there, you can veer off into different progressions. The LMA pedagogy is non-linear. For people who want to run with the theory and design right away, "Pedagogy in practice" jumps ahead to show people what spirited training can look like, how we approach it, and why.
I think of sparring games from the perspective of distance: proximal (near the trunk), distal (near the limbs), and beyond distal (past the limbs). Due to COVID concerns, when we stopped training in isolation and got together, starting with activities from beyond distal—such as foam noodle tag and no-contact games—and progressing to distal activities like kickboxing provided the smoothest transition.
However, adhering to the principle that the Way we do one thing is how we do all things, and considering our non-reliance on specific styles or techniques, lessons from distal training naturally extend to proximal training. Since what we're fostering are better movers, practitioners are better equipped to move in various contexts. This approach enriches our practice across various games, including pushing hands, sumo, grappling, wrestling, judo, and more.
However, if your collective prefers not to transition from sapling to distal games, you can move directly to proximal games instead. Your path is also not path-dependent; you can later transition to distal, just as distal games have transitioned to proximal for us. The benefit of distal games is that they can be done nearly anywhere, but they often need safety equipment. Proximal games don't necessarily require safety equipment; however, they often need a mat, which can limit available training spaces, and specific wardrobe considerations, such as no zippers, pockets, or loose shirts. Proximal training carries a potential for falls; therefore, having safety equipment can significantly smooth the transition from distal to proximal training.
Context informs the Way, which is why a flexible Way adapts to all contexts. Our distal examples are intended to illustrate our philosophy, not prescribe a fixed course for everyone.
Day 11
This was the 11th training session for practitioners RT and RF. They've learned to self-manage and perceive and are now exploring how to do that in motion. During 11 sessions, they've developed concepts of community, partner-focus (as opposed to self-focus/self-consciousness), games/conditions as rulesets, safety rules/concepts, scaling, and sportspersonship. They have acquired and been using safety equipment, which they need for safe, spirited training. The point of the equipment isn't to create harm but to prevent it. Safety equipment gives practitioners the confidence to explore, especially safety concepts like alignment and limb coiling (falling). Safety equipment reduces anxiety.
Without confidence, practitioners will not explore their space or movements—too worried they will get hurt. Sapling games build the confidence to absorb blows, partner-focus and community building foster trust among practitioners, and the equipment does the rest. No one needs to be tough to train.
For us, play means exploring your movement possibilities safely. The LMA Way aligns with land-based education, traditional wayfinding, and Marxist concepts of material conditions, where the environment and conditions primarily guide learning rather than direct colonial instruction. Liberation Martial Arts is not teaching a singular martial art; we're introducing a learning approach that can be applied to anything. Martial arts is just one Way to express this approach.
As the training organizer, I provide the ruleset, and the practitioners adapt and problem-solve within that ruleset. The rules and conditions create a world, and practitioners learn to navigate and engage with that world. Practitioners carry this approach with them into the real world.
In an open learning world, you don't instruct. The training organizer sets the scene and lets learners explore. The learner takes the lead in their own educational process, while the organizer gently guides them by controlling the environment—similar to the approach taken in gentle parenting—rather than controlling the learner.
If you dictate every action, what room is left for exploration? How can practitioners adapt or solve problems on their own? What is left for the practitioner? Direct instruction not only limits the practitioner's role; it also assumes the instructor is infallible. However, instruction is static, while the world is dynamic and contextual. Locking in one answer and denying learners the opportunity to explore can lead to path dependency, creating dependents, not independent thinkers. Path dependency does not allow you to search for answers, leaving coloniality as the sole source for answers. This forces us to assume the only answer must be the right one.
In LMA, we foster Wayfinding, and practitioners dictate how they move. LMA is ultimately the art of adapting to conditions.
The practitioners learned everything you see in the video on their own through guided exploration. Learning is self-directed, partner-guided, and conditions-informed. I design the conditions, explain the rules, and organize the partners, but once gameplay starts, I only intervene when I think something is unsafe. Everyone understands learning is messy, and so long as they're within the ballpark of the game and they're not hurting themselves, each other, or breaking any rules, they're free to move as they please.
Practitioners are not fixed points in time. Where they are now is not where they will be in the future. This awareness creates ease for all practitioners and training organizers. Since there is no coach, there is also no anxious, overbearing coach. Everything is chill.
Micromanaging and perfectionism result from a lack of trust and faith in the practitioners. If the environment is top-down, where the coach thinks lowly of the practitioners, the practitioners will think lowly of themselves and each other. Top-down and instructor/instruction-led always means a lack of trust and faith in learners. If there was faith in the learners, the environment would be bottom-up. If the environment is fertile with trust and faith, practitioners will have more faith in themselves, leading to better learning.
Context
Context is key. Top-down direct instruction can be appropriate if there is urgency and time is lacking. Gyms and centers for learning lack those constraints. The bottom-up LMA approach takes time and investment. You don't wait until you are thirsty to dig a well; you dig a well before you are thirsty. If you want crops in the future, you plant now. You don't wait until you're in the air to learn how to fly. However, direct instruction is critical if you're already in the air.
From the LMA perspective, a dangerous contradiction and incoherence emerge when radicals demand free play during siege and top-down orthodoxy during times for play and learning.
For example, if a house is on fire and only one person knows how to extinguish it, they must immediately give instructions to everyone else. Taking time to explore can mean everyone's demise. You develop Wayfinding before the crisis to navigate the crisis.
Similarly, a gentle parent must act decisively if they see their child about to harm themselves, either by shouting "stop" or intervening directly. A parent invests in gentle guidance early on to avoid the need for direct intervention. They're preparing the child to spot their own risks because a parent can't see everything. It takes more time at the beginning but saves time going forward.
The LMA Way invests in the practitioners, but I step in without hesitation when I see something unsafe. The purpose of direct instruction is not to educate but to cause immediate action. We must distinguish learning from immediate action. Top-down direct instruction has its place, depending on the context. But let's be clear, it is not education.
As a human being, parent, and training organizer, I will use direct instruction when necessary; it's just not my primary approach. It's indispensable when you're defending your boundaries or personhood. "Stop!" I'm not going to use gentle parenting if I'm kicking a fascist out of a space. When it comes to the safety of others, I have to enforce hard rules, even with learners. It's about the goal: am I trying to teach a lesson or cause an immediate action? Political resistance is about education, but it's also about immediate actions.
If the Way is truly flexible, it must accommodate all contexts. Refusing to allow such flexibility is, in itself, rigid, orthodox, absolute, and authoritarian. Not everything revolves around education. You give the starving person food now; they don't have time to learn to farm. However, any experience can become informative later.
Time, safety, and low stakes are luxuries not available to everyone or every situation. In some movements and countries, situations are matters of life or death, not mere games or play. Operating under siege necessitates different approaches. Immediate results are not about immediate learning—the purpose is results. Learning for tomorrow is a luxury when you don't know if there will be a tomorrow.
Furthermore, the risk of infiltrators and information leaks prevents knowledge transfer. A plan's focus is on execution, not creating teachable moments. Prioritizing the journey over the results is a privilege.
When stakes are high, and danger is present, people can't learn. They can memorize and follow orders rather than consolidate coherent knowledge. This explains why, after traumatic events, individuals often spend a long time, or even their entire lives, processing that information. Students in campus uprisings didn't have time to learn the art of group melee or shield formations. Creating a result meant following what other people were doing and following instructions.
In contrast, self-directed learning requires time and low stakes, while order-following can be quickly implemented in high-stakes situations. This is why I constantly emphasize that LMA does not exist for any single use-case. It's open-ended, allowing practitioners to determine how they will apply it, tailored to each unique situation.
LMA is low-stakes, which is why it works. You don't start it out of immediate necessity but from a place of exploration and enjoyment. This is why it's best to start now while it's still fun rather than waiting until the time for fun has passed.
RT and RF
Despite RT being over 200 lbs heavier than RF and RF being a decade younger, by day 11, I can trust them to explore safely. RF trusts RT, and RT trusts himself. Since they both know how to scale, they can engage in spirited training and gain from each other. Since everyone goes through the same process and knows the same rules, they feel safe. Since the LMA approach is about ensuring each other's safety and growth, there is mutual trust.
RT already has the control to go with any practitioner of any size, and RF feels confident to go with anyone without intimidation or hesitation. They're developing their movement repertoire but already showing poise and composure. They know how to pace. They know how to give and take. Despite this being a combat sport, we treat it as a team sport where team members pass each other the ball. They're free from distraction and attuned to each other. They see the shots coming and respond.
RF, in particular, does not overreact to shots. You can't judge a book by its cover. Her perception of intensity/impact is not overexcited but just right. For RT, rather than power, he's exploring shot selection and volume. They don't flinch or close their eyes; they're not timid but rooted. Both are jockeying to control the center of the pitch—our play area. The best thing about the LMA approach is that they're not consciously thinking about any of this; they're simply having fun.
Since practitioners learn from the conditions and each other, I organized RT to train with RF because he had a habit of uprooting himself and losing balance. Since RF is smaller, RT automatically planted himself down. I didn't have to say a thing. Just from the change in conditions, RT no longer uprooted himself.
Coaches can yell all they want and try to break practitioners' habits by badgering them, but habits aren't conscious decisions. How can a learner deliberately stop something they're not deliberately doing? These behaviors occur automatically. The motivation to change a habit should also not be to please someone else. Attempts to create change by triggering self-consciousness, especially belligerently, will likely backfire, causing the practitioner to freeze up. Not only will they revert to their automatic behaviors, but the internal noise created by this stress will also prevent them from learning anything new.
Thinking about what you are doing as you do it, all within the confines of working memory and limited bandwidth, is overwhelming and often impossible during dynamic situations. This state is antithetical to flow and Wayfinding. It forces you to focus solely on self-monitoring, blocking out anything irrelevant to that task—including learning or performing well. For example, a quarterback who thinks about their throw as they make it is not only more likely to worsen their throw but also may fail to notice an oncoming tackle. A self-conscious performer becomes a worse performer. From a training perspective, this does not just hinder learning; it can cause regression.
Constant instruction and criticism can be toxic and counterproductive for learners and the training environment—this is distinctly different from being on the ground during a resistance movement under siege. The problem is not with the practitioner but the coach and their methods. The LMA approach focuses on changing conditions rather than dictating behavior. This empowers practitioners and enriches the training environment instead of poisoning it.
Something you might not have noticed in the video is how effortlessly the practitioners switch between left and right staggered stances. It's all the same to them—dynamic perception and movement. What's been seeded from day one is that whether it's from left to right, front to back, offense to defense, there is no difference and no gap. In this video are the initial sketches that will later become refined art.
To access the Liberation Martial Arts curriculum and contribute to the sustainability of this project, consider upgrading your membership. If you've been putting it off, now would be a great time to sign up. Find other ways to support us here. – Sam
✊✊✊
(I write daily about martial arts and other topics from a liberatory perspective. If you like my work, upgrade your subscription. You can also support me on Patreon or make a one-time donation on Ko-fi. Find Southpaw at its website. Get the swag on Spring. Also check out Liberation Martial Arts Online.)
Share this post