Nationalism and the Irish Language

O'Morris

thebman wrote:

Is their any evidence linking pride in ones country to performance in sports or companies?

I would be very surprised if national pride was found not to be a strong motivating factor in sporting success.

I wasn't saying there was a link between national pride and sporting or business success anyway. I was drawing the analogy between company/team pride and national pride. Other things being equal, a company made up of people with a strong sense of identity and a strong sense of pride is very likely to have the competitive edge over companies without those things. I think the same is true of countries.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

T runner

donegalfella wrote: »

Do you really have to have every point explained over and over? It has already been noted that receptive language skills are most active at a young age. Why not start French and German at age 5 and leave Irish until age 13?

Sorry but you do not need to have French or German up to first language standard to be fluent in it. Speaking it from secondary school is sufficient and there is plenty of secondary schools teaching it. I have secondary French and third only German and have worked in thise countries in the past with no linguistic difficulties.

The recession is now officially over in those countries, and to claim that there is "no work there even for fluent speakers" is nonsense.

Unemployment rate still rising in these countries which is more relevent, no? There is no work there even for fluent speakers.

People are choosing Australia for economic reasons. There is not one person in Australia lamenting that their country betrayed them because they couldnt learn German in national school. Get real.

Again, that's your nationalism talking. Millions of parents around the world send their children to music lessons, and consider music to be a vital component of their children's education. A statistically insignificant number of parents send their children to Irish-speaking schools.

I have pointed out the fact that sending a child to a music conservatory is a bigger decision than sending a child to music lessons. A decision which involves the choice of school is a bigger decision than a decision which does not. You cant argue with this so you argue against a strawman instead.

No, as it happens, I don't.

You dont agree with compulsory education? Does that mean you feel it should be entirely up to parents whether children attend school or not?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

O'Morris

Donegalfella wrote:

I'm sure you and O'Morris will find common ground there.

I think you'll find that most people will find common ground with O'Morris there. Or do you honestly imagine that most people don't have a problem with excessive multiculturalism? Is it a case of nothing in excess except multiculturalism?

Eliot Rosewater

Herbal Deity wrote: »

Well, positions of power can be abused, nothing new about that, but that isn't an inherent flaw in nationalism.

The problem is that the proponents of nationalism are generally very passionate and as ideologies go it will tend to be forced upon the people more than most. It is especially annoying as nationalistic policy offers little to those who don't "toe the line."

Herbal Deity wrote: »

If the government doesn't dictate curricula, then how does it decide which schools to fund?... etc etc

As I said in my previous post, Im not entirely sure that kind of system should be introduced, at least in the short term.

It would create a system not dissimilar to the university system. Universities don't have standardized curricula at all. A computers degree will be different in each institution in Ireland, yet its still a computers degree. The advantage of this system in inter-institute competition. Universities are under pressure to make sure their course is chosen so they try to create the best courses.

Theres lots of detail to such a school system, and its well outside of the scope of this thread. Most of the questions you posed could be answered through economic reasoning. I believe it would work ideally but Im not so sure the Ireland of today is ready for it.

Herbal Deity wrote: »

We're one of the most successful countries in the EU. What has the Irish language really done that's hindered us hugely?

The opportunity cost of it has been large. That is, think of what could have been achieved if the resources put into Irish had been put towards science eduacation or infrastructure.

O'Morris wrote: »

An Irishsceptic.

Is that the new term for West Brit?

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

metrovelvet

Nationalism will always be tied into education as long as the state is paying for it and history is in the curriculum.

In the US in public primary school, we had to stand and face the flag each morning while saying the pledge of allegiance and singing the national anthem. It took a total of 5 minutes and had no bearing on marks or admissions into other schools.

The deeper question is if Irish has any germane bearing on national identity,which imo it doesn't.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

metrovelvet

Well we had to and this was the 1970s. Without being aware of that case no one would know any different. My mother objected on grounds that my parents were immigrants as well as ideological objections of forcing 6 year olds to recite this in unison. She was told to put me in private school if she didnt like it where they dont have to say it.

Grudaire

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Well I still feel that not just yourself, but the entire anti-Irish side of the discussion has had thanking diarrhoea. But then again I save my thanks for particularly good posts, not just anyone who agrees with my point of view

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

metrovelvet

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

That's another weird thing. Children not born here, citizen or not, dont have to take the exam, but children born here, who are denied citizenship do have to take the exam.

Valmont

Cliste wrote: »

I save my thanks for particularly good posts

Well maybe you didn't think it was funny. I certainly did.

I simply saw the opportunity for a joke on behalf of the dying (fact) Irish language. So untrue is perhaps too harsh a judgement.

Eliot Rosewater

Cliste wrote: »

But then again I save my thanks for particularly good posts, not just anyone who agrees with my point of view

Thanks

O'Morris

Eliot Rosewater wrote:

Is that the new term for West Brit?

Not at all. An Irishsceptic is just someone feels the same hostility towards the idea of Ireland being a nation as the eurosceptics feel towards the idea of Europe being a nation. I don't consider it a term of abuse and I have no problem with being called a eurosceptic myself. The only people who would consider Irishsceptic an insult would be the people who use eurosceptic as an insult.

Donegalfella wrote:

I believe that most people's definition of "excessive" would not correspond with yours.

If you don't believe that most people's definition of excessive corresponds with mine then why did you assume that Herbal Deity's definition of excessive corresponded with mine? Isn't there as much chance that his definition corresponds with yours?

T runner

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

You seem to add 500 years to that figure every time you quote it.

I entirely support the teaching of history, as distinct from 800-years-of-oppression mythmaking. I would go so far as to say that if history had been taught properly in this country, we might have seen less bloodthirsty nationalism over the past century.

What are you talking about? Are you blaming the history curriculum in the Free State/ROI for the recent troubles in NI? Are you unaware that there have been similar periodic disturbances in NE Ireland for the past 400 years? Are you completely unaware of the dynamics of the conflict there? That is the most idiotic posting Ive read in a long time. Your bias is blinding.

Can you substantiate in any way your 800 years oppression theory? I didn't think so.
Exactly which aspects of the History curriculum have you most trouble with?
Do you know the history curriculum?

The Corinthian

O'Morris wrote: »

Not at all. An Irishsceptic is just someone feels the same hostility towards the idea of Ireland being a nation as the eurosceptics feel towards the idea of Europe being a nation.

In fairness to Eliot Rosewater, I think he is simply sceptical of nationhood in general, not specifically Irish - an anti-nationalist.

Also, I think the correct term would be hibernosceptic, in keeping with how such words are constructed in English, if such a term exists in the first place.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

T runner

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

No you are backtracking. You said that the way history "was taught in this country" caused a lot of bloodshed. Now you are backtracking and saying it didnt help.

Certainly: "800 years of oppression" (along with "8 centuries of relentless and unremitting warfare" is explicitly cited in the IRA's training manual (the so-called "Green Book") as historical justification for that organization's terrorist campaign against the UK. That is direct and clear example of nationalist historiography used as justification for nationalist violence.

Another strawman. You claimed the way history was taught in the ROI was responsible for nationalist violence in this century. Now you are claiming that a certain line in an IRA training manual was responsible.
There is a word for that that I daren't use.

The Corinthian

T runner wrote: »

There is a word for that that I daren't use.

Is it anything like the love that dare not speak its name?

T runner

The Corinthian wrote: »

Is it anything like the love that dare not speak its name?

No, is the answer to that homophobic insult.

The Corinthian

T runner wrote: »

No, is the answer to that homophobic insult.

Homophobic? No. I think you may have understood something quite different to it's meaning.

shayno90

Seems like a very one sided argument just bashing Gaelige. Problem is Irish people's attitude to learning languages is terrible. They realize they can speak a universally spoken language, become lazy and so don't care about learning how to speak another one (can many Irish secondary students speak a foreign language without memerizing blocks of set text!). Also, don't kids in secondary schools have to take another European language as a compulsory subject, yet you don't take issue with this. The emphasize should be towards teaching Irish not through a book and should be directed towards speaking it daily in schools. Plus, the majority of teachers aren't up to the standard of teaching the language.
Why are so many of the "new" Irish complaining about this as they exempt from learning Irish! If you move to another country, in order to integrate with the culture it is necessary to learn about a key part of that country's identity and not for the adopted country to conform to your whims!!
Only in Ireland, is language an issue, some people here are associating it with negative connotations from Irish history and want to eradicate it and be like the UK or US, great models for social integration aren't they!!

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

The Corinthian

shayno90 wrote: »

Seems like a very one sided argument just bashing Gaelige.

Public opinion's a bitch.

If you move to another country, in order to integrate with the culture it is necessary to learn about a key part of that country's identity and not for the adopted country to conform to your whims!!

This is the problem. Irish is not actually a key part of Ireland's identity any more. It's not the spoken language for any of the cities or the vast majority of the country. Irish is part of our identity, but then again so is Irish dancing - but I don't see dressing up like Michael Flatley becoming compulsory in school.

Essentially you are suggesting that the vast majority of the country instead conform to the whims of, at this stage, tiny minority who seem to be living in some strange nationalist fantasy that has ignored the last century.

I don't see this helping the language, unfortunately. I do think it can probably be saved, but not if we still pretend that it is a sacred cow or that the policies of the last century are not ultimately the reason that it is at death's door today. Keep that up and this debate will be moot within a few decades at best.

T runner

The Corinthian wrote: »

Homophobic? No. I think you may have understood something quite different to it's meaning.

Please elaborate on its meaning if you are telling the truth. Homosexuality is "the love that dare not speak its name". What exactly did you mean?

The Corinthian

T runner wrote: »

Please elaborate on its meaning if you are telling the truth. Homosexuality is "the love that dare not speak its name". What exactly did you mean?

LOL. Best I don't. It may not have been homophobic, but neither was it complimentary and I'd rather not fall foul of the moderators.

If it makes you feel better, there was no inference towards sexual orientation, whatsoever.

T runner

The Corinthian wrote: »

LOL. Best I don't. It may not have been homophobic, but neither was it complimentary and I'd rather not fall foul of the moderators.

If it makes you feel better, there was no inference towards sexual orientation, whatsoever.

Yes, it was a homophobic insult. The only reference to "a love that dare not speak its name" is Wildes reference to homosexuality.

Im not surprised you dont elaborate. Youre clearly a coward.

Bigdeadlydave

I can only speak from my own perspective as a 6th year student..... Its true that some students don't care for Irish but there are many that do. And to say that Irish isn't a key part of our culture is ridiculous! Sure the national anthem is as Gaelige!
I think that the main fault with Irish today is not that it is compulsory its the way that it is taught. For instance by my junior cert I knew more French than Irish despite only studying it for 3 years! Many posters here seem to be under the illusion that students dislike learning Irish.... That may be true but I would be hard pressed to find a friend of mine who doesent prefer it to some other subject he is doing.(maths?) I think an argument could be made that the stuff you learn in higher level maths is as irrelevant to later life as some say Irish is-however due to my limited life experience I will leave that to someone else. Personally I wish I had of been sent to a Gaelscoil as I would have found the LC course much easier rather than struggling my way through it...



And to the guys above moaning "he called me gay!"-seriously, grow up.