What the G-8 Can learn from the UFC
What the G-8 can learn from…cage fighting? Last week the Group of Eight (G-8) industrialized countries met in Italy to…
What the G-8 can learn from…cage fighting?
Last week the Group of Eight (G-8) industrialized countries met in Italy to discuss a litany of global challenges. That following weekend, a summit of a different kind occurred as the Ultimate Fighting Championship (UFC) held its landmark 100th championship cage fighting event–the Super Bowl of mixed martial arts (MMA). Though it may seem counterintuitive, the G-8 has much it can learn from the grand summitry on display at UFC100.
The world of MMA is often opaque to outsiders, most of whom carry in their heads John McCain’s infamous description of the sport as human cockfighting. Perhaps this is understandable. It is difficult for many people to get past the imagery of a man being punched in the face while he’s pinned to the ground or a person’s arm being bent to the point that it causes so much pain that they would rather surrender than continue fighting. MMA is admittedly violent–brutal even–but to those within the MMA subculture, the nature of the competition often transcends the violence itself. Ask any fighter to reflect on their experience in the cage and you will likely hear them describe it as freeing, pure, or even enlightening.
More important than the narrow interests of the individual competitors, however, is the event itself. UFC100 was an embrace of contemporary realities in a way that should cause the G-8 and other international decision making bodies to sit up and take notice.
Whereas the G-8 summit reflected a configuration of power that becomes increasingly irrelevant with the passage of time, UFC100 was a paragon of success in a new era often characterized by globalization. The UFC itself is a successful organization because it embraces diversity and functions on the principle of merit. The popularity and effectiveness of traditional martial arts such as karate and kung fu has waned precisely because those arts refused to evolve and open themselves to accepting new best practices.
The UFC, by contrast, saw the increased connectivity and communication happening between people in different countries and sought to determine who the best fighter was and which martial arts style was the best, regardless of country of origin. With the advent of the UFC in the early 1990s, no longer could individual styles and individual fighters hide behind the borders or language of their respective countries. A new world was coming into existence and martial artists had to either adapt or face increasing irrelevance.
The G-8 now faces a challenge akin to that which faced martial arts in the early 1990s: a global paradigm shift. During the Cold War, the international system was defined as a bipolar order and the rules and institutions of the international system were defined by the U.S.-Soviet divide. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the world entered into a uni-polar era where the United States alone shaped institutions and rules of the game. The world is now changing yet again as it enters an era of multi-polarity. No longer will the United States be the sole superpower; instead, it will be joined by Brazil, India, China, and others. As a multi-polar world comes into being, existing international institutions are becoming outmoded. The UN Security Council’s permanent members consist of those nations that came out on the winning side of World War II. The overwhelming majority of voting shares in the World Bank and IMF belong to Western nations despite increasing contributions from newly industrialized and developing nations. And the G-8 excludes Brazil, China, and India, three nations that many believe will fundamentally reshape the world’s future.
As these nations come into their own as new powers in global affairs, institutions like the G-8 will either have to adapt to changing configurations of power in international relations or face growing irrelevance. Although there are clear limits to an analogy between the G-8 and UFC, there are nevertheless useful observations to be passed from one organization to another. The world needs international institutions to solve the problems that cross the borders of individual nations. Climate change, terrorism, and nuclear proliferation are problems that no nation can solve on its own. It is therefore imperative that the G-8 and others take a chapter from the UFC’s book: accept the world for what it is, adapt, and capitalize on change rather than shun it.
