Lee’s influence was multifaceted, immeasurable. His specific martial art, kung fu, remains reasonably popular, but other forms have risen on the glamour that he brought to the table. Mixed martial arts has emerged as a legitimate sport, while aikido and tae kwon do are becoming virtually essential supplements to standard education. In parts of South America, tae kwon do is the second most popular sport after soccer. Colombia is considering mandating it in school. In America, and to a lesser extent in Europe, it is becoming a rite of middle-class life: You take your kids to tae kwon do either before or after you take them to violin lessons.
There’s a reason that martial arts have become so popular with parents: A series of studies from Europe and the U.S. have shown huge benefits from early martial arts education. It is not in any way about learning how to beat people up. It is about learning to sit still and listen to orders. The largest study of tae kwon do in American schools found remarkable increases in “executive function development,” confirming earlier work on its role as a creator of “self-regulation.” Martial arts are particularly good for boys, and have a strong effect on kids with ADHD. Earning a black belt feeds a child’s hunger for demonstrable accomplishment. In short, when you read a New York Times op-ed about a problem in contemporary education with boys, the solution is probably a discipline-based form of martial arts.
These recent studies contain a kind of implicit indictment of the educational trends of the past thirty years. Collaborative, esteem-building education models have become dominant in many schools. And for the most part, parents and teachers approve of those more “civilized” forms of education. But then the same parents sign their kids up for martial arts — basically the Marines for tots — paying extra for a hierarchical, militaristic, structured form of rote physical learning.