I host a club at my school (in Chicago) and I am promoting the regaelicization of Ireland and the belief that the Gael deserves the ability to determine his/her own destiny within the island of Ireland.
That being said, my Irish is very rudimentary, and I wanted to check to make sure that the following was an accurate translation of "Irish Club":
Cumman na Éireannach
Just to clarify, by "Irish" I am not referring to the language, but the people (also, I chose not to use the word "Gaeil", I wanted it to be inclusive of all inhabitants of Ireland).
Thanks

Cumann na nÉireannach

Association/ Society/ Community/ Club of Irish People



What do you mean by this statement?

Cian

_________________

Please wait for corrections/ more input from other forum members before acting on advice

I meant that since the Gael is native to Ireland, that all native Irish people should be able to participate in a government that controls the entirety of the island, including Northern Ireland, which existed with systems to deny native Irish in Northern Ireland rights, and instead power was in the hands of people descended from colonists.

A Gael is a linguistic definition that denotes a Gaelic speaking person; i.e. a person who speaks a Q-Celtic (Goídelic) language, which includes people from Scotland (Scottish Gaelic) and the Isle of Man (Manx). Some also expand the definition to include those whose ancestors were Gaelic speaking. Therefore, Gael is not confined to somebody living within the geographically determined boundary of Ireland.

How do you define a native Irish person? The idea of "native" is kind of a false concept, population groups have been moving and influencing other population groups since the time humans emerged as a species. The prevailing thought among academics at the moment is that the Gaelic language came from without and developed in Ireland through a process known as Cumulative Celticity (at the moment there's no real consensus as to where exactly Goídelic came from). That means there were people in Ireland before the Gaels - or should I more accurately say a Goídelic language - came here. So, no, Goídelic, or the Celtic language that became it, probably didn't originate in Ireland.

Furthermore, by the very definition of Gael, most people living on the island of Ireland today could not be considered under the term. And just to add, up until c. 1920s there were native Irish speakers (Gaels) living on the Shankill Road - arguably the staunchest Unionist community in Belfast - who would of adamantly opposed Home Rule and other measures that would have diluted links with Britain. Also, the so called "Brave 13" (Apprentice Boys) - who closed the gates of Derry which resulted in a siege that to this day stands as a symbol for Unionism and has inspired such unionist slogans as "No Surrender" "(London)Derry still under siege" - were also probably Gaels.

Being a Gael has really only become divisive in the last 100 years by people superimposing political ideologies onto language and linguistic concepts. The Irish language should be a point of reconciliation rather than a point of conflict. In the words of Douglas Hyde, Protestant and first president of Ireland:

"The Irish Language, thank God, is neither Protestant or Catholic, it is neither Unionist or Separatist" (i.e. Nationalist)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs5fqq2YumA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVnI7yEQJoQ (correction to her video: there is no evidence to suggest that the Gaelic language itself goes as far back as the Bronze Age. Also, Gaelic is not the Celtic language most associated with Wales and Cornwall today, they (used to) speak the Brythonic languages of Welsh and Cornish. Gaelic was also spoken in the current Welsh region of Gwyned due to Irish invaders settling there following the retreat of the Roman Empire- but Irish didn't survive in that region as a community language in modern times).




Yes, Catholics - who were automatically thought of as being nationalists - were subject to horrific institutionalised discrimination. For instance, children were spat at and verbally abused as they walked to and from their Catholic schools, while having to be protected by police officers in full riot gear; and the practice of Gerrymandering, i.e giving houses to Protestant families over Catholics, mainly because your right to a vote was determined by whether or not you had an address of residence. No vote meant no governmental representation, which consolidated and protected the Protestant/ Unionist ascendancy.

However, a lot of change has occurred over the last 30yrs or so due to civil rights movements; such as the Civil Rights marches, civil disobedience with hunger strikes and an attempt to fight back etc... . But, more importantly because there was an increased appetite for political dialogue, which has resulted in various positive outcomes, e.g. the "Good Friday Agreement" etc... . And today, the Government of Northern Ireland is now made up a lot of people who are sympathetic to the Nationalists' cause, which is far more representative of the population as a whole.

However, there are many nationalists who do not want a united Ireland at the moment, because of the instability of the Irish economy and the fact that the only way NI itself can stay afloat is through large subsidies from the British Government; subsidies that the Irish Government cannot afford. There are also many people in Northern Ireland who will never want to break their allegiance with Britain (mostly Unionists), but who also identify themselves as being Irish (or Northern Irish at least). They have every right to the Irish label as a Nationalist does.

I, personally would love to see a united Ireland, but it doesn't look likely in my lifetime.

Cian

_________________

Please wait for corrections/ more input from other forum members before acting on advice

Very interesting points, Cian. You are correct in the definition of a Gael as someone whose native language is a Gaelic one, however, I disagree with you on the statement regarding the concept of a native Irish person.
Irish Gaelic is native to the island, in the sense that the people that subscribe to Gaelic cultures and traditions inhabit the majority, have been so for thousands of years, and have been subject to a foreign government that attempted to impose British (and unfortunately, as you said "automatically thought of" as Protestant) culture in areas with deeply held Irish Gaelic roots. The best example is Northern Ireland- people descended from the Planters have benefited from their status for hundreds of years and abused their power as Protestants in order to further the Unionist agenda.
I am inclined to believe that your statement regarding the concept of "native people" being fluid is only true when the entirety of the previous people have been eradicated or have assimilated into the new culture. Take the United States for example. No WASP person can or should consider themselves "native", and instead, recognize that Native Americans are native to the many regions controlled by the United States.
The people of Ireland now control the majority of the country and are not subject to old imperialist practices. The Irish language and Irish Gaelic culture are practiced by a significant amount of Irish people. However, since the Unionist agenda is rooted in colonization, I find it incredibly difficult to sympathize with any arguments put out by that community. They should relinquish their position as a majority in a gerrymandered Northern Ireland, and accept minority status within the island of Ireland, with proper representation within Dáil Éireann.
All in all, I do believe you are correct that assigning the Irish language to a political goal is wrong. No language should be politically charged, and all people should be free to learn it. However, it seems to often be the case that DUP councillors are opposed to the growth of the Irish language. It is this mindset of colonialism (despite the adopting of the colonized people's language) that I am utterly opposed to, and that as soon as the Republic is economically capable of managing all of Ireland, then all people who are Irish by descent should push this agenda.

Here's a great article on why a United Ireland would be economically powerful:

http://www.irishexaminer.com/business/u ... 88959.html

However, we see that some of the largest media networks in Northern Ireland are politically affiliated through their use of loaded language. Take the Belfast Telegraph for example, who is quick to call out any signs of dissident republicanism yet publishes stories like these very frequently (this one specifically is the Unionist response to the above article):

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/ ... 60557.html