In fact, much of what today is regarded as ‘ancient traditions’ in Capoeira Angola was re-designed back in the 80s and 90s when some Mestres from Brazil got in contact with the US Black Movement. Unfortunately much of the US approach was absorbed and forced into a social reality that is completely different. Yet, having an ‘absolute conviction’ of their approach to Capoeira some of these Mestres can take pretty much everything as a personal attack, as you said. But this is not exclusive to Capoeira Angola though.

As for the strategies we might adopt in order to combat fundamentalist approaches, I believe the more we discuss, the more we bring awareness to how such behaviours are based upon false premises, or twisted ones, the more these fundamentalist teachers (from whatever style) will be challenged by sharp minded students, and the less their approach will be limiting one’s view of the diverse cultural dimensions of the art.

Yet, sometimes a one-o-one confrontation with these extremist Mestres will be necessary, and is important to know that, as far as there is mutual respect, every one can have their say in Capoeira regardless of ethnic background, graduation, skin color, gender. If one is practising the art, such person is as responsible as everyone else for its future. Every role is important (students, instructors, Mestres) as they’re complementary and without one of them the other wouldn’t exist.

Capoeira is made by everyone’s participations and contributions, but it doesn’t belong to no one!

@ Compasso
I’m not ahead Buddy, we’re all walking together when our thoughts and actions are for the sake of the practice! ;)

I believe I’ve answered/commented much of your arguments discussing ‘strategies’ @ Futa.

Axé para todos vocês! E muito obrigado pelas contribuições!
Eurico

You asked ‘ What if everyone decides not to fight these dogmatic ppl ?’
Even though that is a very logical question to pose to my statement , it is kind of making it a runaway train argument , in my perception . What I mean by that is that it is taking the opinion to its extreme because the question can be seen as ‘ what if *everyone* decides *never* to fight back ? ‘ Never fighting back makes you stand in a very very small corner at best :-)
I only meant that we should choose who to confront in this struggle . Some people are not willing to argue and in that case you might as well talk to a wall . An opinioned , biased wall . :-)

This is not making a case for not defending your point . Just for choosing your opponent . There are many normal people who are not informed yet , or not made sensitive to these changes yet , who would be a much better target for attention , I believe .
Basically engaging the tyran’s support group would be more efficient than standing around his house shouting at him personally . :-)

Of course you are way ahead of me , I think you are doing a great job engaging so many people (including me ) with rich thougths right now .

axe !

I always thought of the practice of local teachers visiting new instructors and ‘testing them out’ in the roda and in conversation as a form of ‘quality control’. To use Leite Derramado’s metaphor, for these teachers, the importance is not whether you have Microsoft certification, but instead whether you are able to use and teach about that software effectively. In that way they test out the new teacher’s skills and also personality. What CM Eurico is telling here, however, sounds more like ‘absolute control’, that is, Luiz Eduardo is effectively saying: “I am THE master of Capoeira Angola here, so all matters pertaining to Capoeira Angola must me run by ME”. To continue the metaphor, its like saying “if its not Microsoft Certified THERE’S NO WAY it can be good.”
This can be taken as simply politics or trying to control market share etc, but I think that while this may be true to a degree, I think it touches on much deeper issues. Alot of the more radical Angoleiros, for example, are staunch members of the Black Movement in Brazil and elsewhere, and perhaps feel that their culture has been ‘appropriated’ long enough. Because of this, they wish to take that control back and ‘de-colonize’ Capoeira. So it seems to me, that to disagree with them will often be taken as a personal attack on their cultural identity, rather than just an attack on their views.
I agree with Eurico that those who disagree with dogmatic people should not feel that can not fight against the closed stances such people may take. The difficulty is often that it is such a personal matter for many people, that when you try to fight their dogma, you end up fighting the person themselves. I think in such cases its a matter of standing your ground and agreeing to disagree. Rather than trying to dismantle the weapons of the other person, its better to live conforming to your own principles and preferring to discuss the point with those who may have a similar standpoint to the dogmatic person, but are more open to debate. If you can come to see eye-to-eye with this kind of person, you make more progress. A radical Angoleiro, for example, may interpret criticism by someone outside their tradition as just another instance of ignorant cultural imperialism, but would be more open to an ‘insider’ who states those very same views. In that way, finding solutions with open ‘insiders’ can be more productive than talking to the person who is shouting with their hands over their ears.

Thanks for your contribution! I’m agree with you and Leite. Capoeira works as a metaphor for life because it really encompasses all kinds of people and forces in it; and this is also the reason why it is such a powerful instrument equiping us for life. But what do you think it’ll happen with our practice if everyone decides to do not fight these dogmatic people within the art?

Axé!
Eurico