Draft Program for Irish Liberation

Irish Liberation Policy December 2023

A liberation policy is a description of how a group that has been oppressed can achieve liberation. It includes details of how the oppression has operated and been internalised within the group, clear statements of what is true of these people inherently, the human qualities that their culture has valued and nurtured, and the attitudes, perspectives, and strategies that are central to achieving liberation.

At an individual level, the process of liberation involves discharging the feelings that hinder us, reclaiming pride in who we are, building close relationships, holding out pro-human perspectives based on a clear picture of reality, acting in ways that contradict the oppression, including the winning of allies, and taking concrete steps to end the oppression. This policy sets out how this would work in practice for Irish people.

Finally, like other policies of the Re-evaluation Counselling (RC) Community, this is a draft policy. As we gain a deeper understanding of Irish oppression and how to recover from it, this draft will be amended and improved. In the meantime, it provides a useful introduction to and overview of our current thinking about Irish liberation.

Who We Are

Irish society comprises a rich mix of people born on the island of Ireland as well as their descendants, and people who have moved or immigrated to the island either temporarily or permanently.

For the purpose of counselling on Irish liberation, Irish people include those born on the island of Ireland and their descendants, regardless of class, culture, creed, ethnic background, where they live in the world, or other differences. We also include people, regardless of their background or other identities, who have experienced anti-Irish oppression. And we include people born on the island who claim a British heritage or identity (and their descendants) who choose also to claim an Irish identity.

Others of us have acquired an Irish identity, for example, naturalised Irish citizens, but may not have experienced the historical oppression of Irish people or internalised that oppression. We may, however, be affected indirectly by the internalised Irish oppression in the culture around us or we may have struggles around assimilation or being accepted by other Irish people. These may include experiences of racism, xenophobia, or other forms of mistreatment.

For people with an English or US identity, in particular, who make their home in Ireland and acquire an Irish identity, an important part of the counselling work they do will involve discharging oppressor material connected to these other identities.

A challenge for this work is to create safety and space for us to discharge any feelings connected to being or becoming Irish and to create an inclusive society free of oppression.

Diversity of Our Heritages

Our pre-history is not fully understood but it includes connections to the peoples of northern Europe and Mediterranean regions.

We include descendants of the original inhabitants of the island and later arriving groups such as Vikings, Normans, Huguenots, Scottish, English, Welsh, Chinese, Nigerian, Vietnamese, Indian, Pakistani, Romanian, Lithuanian, Latvian, Polish, Estonian, Roma, Syrian, and various other nationalities.

We also include many different religious heritages including Roman Catholic, Protestant (Anglican, Presbyterian, Baptist, Methodist, Quaker, and others), Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Baha’i, people of other religions, people who identify as atheists and people with no religious identity.

Identity

It is useful to see any identity other than human as being rooted in painful feelings and oppression. We claim an Irish identity at this point as a tool so we can discharge and heal the hurts and oppression attached to it. It is also the case that the identity will reflect important human qualities. As we do this discharge work, our connection to these human qualities will be strengthened. In the end, we are then free to discard the identity and live a more fully human life.

In claiming it, we recognise that Irish identity is neither homogeneous nor static. It is diverse and changes over time. In the past, it has been seen (and stereotyped) as comprising a set of elements that were held to be uniquely and centrally ‘Irish’ (for example, Irish language, traditional Irish music, Roman Catholic religion, and so on). Sometimes, these elements were seen as necessary requirements for the identity. In reality, however, Irish identity is not confined to any one religious, ethnic, or national tradition and includes elements from a wide range of our diverse heritages.

Claiming an Irish identity does not preclude any person from claiming other national identities in addition. In RC,we have found it useful to claim fully (100%) every identity that we have, including all our national identities. It follows that no Irish person is more or less Irish than any other. It is possible to claim completely an Irish identity and a US identity, or an Irish identity and a British identity, or an Irish identity and a Nigerian identity, or any other combination of identities that are part of a person’s heritage. Just as Irish people may choose to identify as both Irish and American, there is no inherent conflict when someone chooses to identify as both Irish and British.

Indigenous Irish

Most Irish people are indigenous. An indigenous identity refers to people who, in their history or currently, have experienced dispossession of their land, suppression of their language, religion, and culture, along with the experience of genocide. Indigenous Irish include those who are descended from people who were part of the Gaelic, Irish-speaking, largely Catholic, clan-based society that was overcome and colonised by the Normans and English. We comprise people born on the island of Ireland as well as members of the Irish diaspora both white Irish people and Irish people of colour.Many of us retain a strong connection to the land, to the culture, to the people,and to our history in spite of economic or political marginalisation and cultural discrimination.

As indigenous Irish, we share many similarities with indigenous people from other lands and can gain a lot from the work on indigenous liberation. However, unlike a lot of other indigenous peoples, we are predominantly white and not people of the global majority. So, an important, additional part of the work for white, Irish people is to eliminate our racism.

One other difference between Irish and many other indigenous peoples is that the early conquest and colonisation did not involve the suppression of our native religion. Whereas the imposition of Christianity was an integral part of the oppression of many native cultures, Irish people had already adopted Christianity centuries before the arrival of foreign Christian colonisers. However, from the 16^th century onwards, when England became a Protestant country, the suppression of the native Catholic religion became a central part of the colonising project.

Travellers

Travellers are a minority ethnic group who have been part of Irish society for centuries. We number about 32,000 on the island of Ireland and are heavily oppressed within the culture. Worldwide, there are many thousands more Irish Travellers.

In Ireland, Travellers experience extremely high levels of unemployment and face on-going struggles to obtain appropriate accommodation. Our infant mortality and our suicide rates are significantly higher than the national average, while our life expectancy is lower. Only a small proportion of Travellers have a third-level educational qualification, and the education system historically has not been supportive of our participation. We face high levels of prejudice and discrimination within the broader Irish society.

Important parts of Traveller culture include extended family, community, religion, respect for older people, crafts, music, storytelling, horses, caravans, language (Cant, Gammon or Shelta), and nomadism.

While a small number of individual settled people have taken steps to become allies for Travellers, very little work has been done by settled people generally on their relationships with Travellers. Given the widespread oppression of Travellers, a key challenge is for settled people to discharge their oppressor material and become effective allies for us. This means recognising that it is not possible to grow up in Irish society as a settled person and not internalise at least some of the prejudices towards Travellers that have been embedded in the culture.

Our Oppressed and Oppressor Experiences

While recognising and valuing what is rational and positive in the contributions to Irish culture and identity of all the peoples who have been part of our history, we also recognise and acknowledge the role played by oppression. Understanding this history is an important part of our liberation.

At its core, the source of Irish oppression is English domination from the time of the Norman invasion in 1169 until the present day (as we shall see below). From the 16^th century onwards, this central source became essentially English Protestant domination. As English Protestant power expanded, the colonised nations of Cornwall, Wales and Scotland were incorporated into the English colonising project in Ireland.

Like many other nations colonised by England, Irish people have a rich and complex history of active and ongoing opposition to the colonisation, on the one hand, and of active participation in the British Empire project (both in Ireland and in other colonised countries) on the other hand. In the latter case, there is the participation of Irish people in the military, administrative, and commercial expansion of the British Empire (including participation in the genocide of other native peoples). This can be understood particularly in the context of internalised oppression as people struggled to escape their own oppression by taking on oppressor roles.

We recognise the reality of, and the importance of discharging, the painful emotion attached to our colonial history and the residue of division and hurt that has ensued. This involves acknowledging and discharging the effects of colonial oppression along with any oppressor role we, or our ancestors, have also played in this oppression. Experience shows that this process works more effectively to the extent we remember our inherent goodness as humans.

We also recognise that while religious differences have been used to keep us divided, religion itself is not the origin of the divisions between people on this island.

Colonisation and Plantations

The history of the island cannot be fully understood except in the context of a sustained process of colonisation and its effects. This colonisation itself is best understood in the context of the development of feudalism and later of capitalism in Europe generally.

The early attacks by Viking raiders and the foundation of Viking settlements along the coast, principally in the 9^th and 10^th centuries, had a substantial but not overwhelming impact on the native Irish society. Those who settled on the island eventually assimilated into the existing society and culture.

The Norman colonisation of Ireland, beginning in the 12^th century, was largely a response to internalised patterns of domination within their own culture and to the pressures of the feudal system. This required finding new lands with which to reward and occupy the landless sons of the Norman aristocracywho might otherwise cause trouble within their home country.

Conflict between native Irish kings provided an opportunity for Normans from Britain to gain a foothold on this island in 1169. The success of the Norman invasion and fears that they might grow in power led to the English King, Henry II, coming to Ireland soon afterwards (1170-72) to demand loyalty from the Norman aristocracy and native Irish Chieftains.

Over the coming centuries, the English gained more and more power. Methods of oppression were severe, wide-ranging, and often brutal. This led to the eventual elimination of the native Irish clan system and the domination of the English throughout the country following the battle of Kinsale in 1601 and the ‘flight of the Earls’ in 1607.

The original clan system and Gaelic culture were eliminated, and colonisation embedded, through a variety of processes:

· A series of ‘plantations’ where the nativeIrish were dispossessed of the land and replaced by ‘planters’ from Scotland and England or by soldiers who had fought in the English armies of conquest. The most successful of these were in the 17^th century when the planters were mostly Protestant from England and Scotland

· Replacement of the Gaelic land ownership and management system, which was collectivist, quite egalitarian and clan-based, by the system of private property and inheritance by the oldest son

· Replacement of the ancient Brehon legal system with English common law

· The suppression of the Catholic religion and various Penal Laws that severely restricted the rights and powers of Catholics

· Harsh military conquest and accompanying famine and disease that, at various points, caused the death of large numbers of the native population – women, children, and men

· ‘Transportation’ to other colonies and sentencing to bonded servitude of those who resisted and fought against the oppression or who were left vulnerable to exploitation because of the oppression (such as the dependents of Irish men who died in battle or were forced to leave the country without their families)

· The elimination of separate political structures and combining of the two countries into one in 1800 to create the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland with the parliament in London

· The suppression of the Irish language and culture

· The oppression of poor peasants through a system of absentee landlords, harsh rents, and evictions

· The stereotyping and demeaning of the Irish people as savage, immoral, and less than fully human by English politicians and mass media

These were accompanied by high levels of emigration as people attempted to escape the oppression and find a better life for themselves in other countries, primarily England and the United States. Many of the core aspects of traditional native society were eliminated by the middle of the 17^th century.

This colonisation process had a number of effects:

· Severe economic oppression and dispossession from the land with consequent effects on the health and well-being of the population

· Severe political oppression where the bulk of the population was systematically excluded from power

· Severe cultural oppression where the Irish language, Gaelic culture, and the Catholic religion were harshly suppressed, and

· The internalisation of the oppression in a variety of forms that included low self-esteem, feelings of insignificance, powerlessness, and hopelessness, divisiveness, attacking of leaders, and difficulty in valuing their own thinking.

Many of the divisions currently existing in Irish society have their roots in this process of colonisation and reflect the various heritages of coloniser and colonised.

The eventual partition of the island (1920-22) into what became a Roman Catholic-dominated, independent Republic and a Protestant-dominated Northern Ireland that remained incorporated into the United Kingdom further institutionalised the divisions between the different traditions.

While it has been possible for Irish people to celebrate various aspects of our Viking and Norman heritages, we have struggled to come to a clear and shared perspective on the very large British impact. Although much of this impact reflected the oppression, as with any culture there were also positive, pro-human aspects, for example, contributions to science, literature and the arts. As we discharge the hurts associated with Irish oppression, we will be able to separate what was rational and valuable in our history from what was irrational and oppressive.

The Great Famine (or Great Hunger)

This period of mass starvation, disease, and emigration happened between 1845 and 1852. By the 1840s, close on two-fifths of the population were totally dependent on the potato and it was the major food-source of the rest. Between 1845 and 1849, the potato crop failed in three seasons out of four. The result was starvation and disease – dysentery, typhus, and cholera. During this period, it is also the case that large amounts of grain and other food were being exported from the country.

At least one million people died and a million more emigrated, causing the island's population to fall by at least 25%. Some estimates suggest that the decrease may have been closer to 50%. The indigenous population was affected particularly severely. The impact of this sharp decrease in population under such difficult circumstances has had huge effects in terms of language, religion, politics, economics, and other aspects of Irish life. This has left a large residue of undischarged feelings.

In counselling sessions, the challenge is to face the full harshness of Irish history. There may be a tendency to want to ‘skip over’ what happened rather than discharge the grief and anger about it. Undischarged feelings about the recent ‘Troubles’ may also be a reason why people do not face their feelings about our earlier history. (In a similar way, undischarged feelings about our earlier history may also be a reason why some people may not face their feelings about the ‘Troubles’). A key part of our liberation is to acknowledge and discharge all of our feelings about recent and past history.

Genocide

Genocide is a key feature of the colonisation of indigenous peoples around the world. This can take the form of actual physical genocide and also cultural genocide. In the case of the former, at several points in Irish history the population was severely reduced, sometimes by half, through a combination of war, disease, and famine.

In the case of the Great Famine in the middle of the 19^th century, this was welcomed by Trevelyan, the senior British administrator in Ireland, as both a just retribution on the population and a benefit for the economy. He stated that ‘The judgment of God sent the calamity to teach the Irish a lesson, that calamity must not be too much mitigated … the real evil with which we have to contend is not the physical evil of the Famine but the moral evil of the selfish, perverse and turbulent character of the people.’

Apart from acts of physical genocide, there was an ongoing policy of cultural genocide with the aim of eliminating the language, religion, traditions, social system, legal system, and culture of the indigenous Irish.

While the Famine could be said to have operated as a form of genocide by neglect rather than deliberate intent, repeated experiences of war, famine, disease, along with cultural oppression have constituted genocide and have been internalised as such. It has been difficult for Irish people to look at these experiences in detail and the feelings of grief and anger attached to them remain to be discharged.

The effects of genocide are reflected in high levels of violence and fears of violence, suicide, self-harm (including ‘slow suicide’ from alcohol and other harmful substances and habits), and ‘mental health’ issues. These are common among indigenous peoples who have been subjected to genocide. They affect Irish people not only on the island of Ireland but also in the countries of the diaspora.

Partition, Civil War, and the Troubles

The war of independence (1919 – 1921), which followed the 1916 Rising, led to the Anglo-Irish Treaty with the British. The Treaty confirmed a partitioning of the country that had been enacted by the UK Parliament the previous year (1920). The Irish Free State (26 Counties with a large nationalist/pro-independence and Roman Catholic majority) became separate from the United Kingdom. (In 1949 this became the Republic of Ireland). Northern Ireland (6 Counties of Ulster with an overall pro-Union and Protestant majority) continued as a part of the United Kingdom, now re-named the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

Partition institutionalised divisions between Ulster Protestants and the rest of the island, i.e. the Free State/Republic. It also created a large, mostly Catholic, minority in Northern Ireland that was disaffected from the UK and experienced severe, state-supported discrimination.Protestants in the Free State/Republic did not experience discrimination like Catholics in Northern Ireland. However, they found the Catholic ethos and the power of the Catholic Church within the State unwelcoming and restrictive and many left.

The Treaty caused a split among Irish nationalists and led to a civil war in the Free State (1922-23). In the end, the pro-Treaty side won. The anti-Treaty Irish Republican Army (IRA) refused to accept partition and in subsequent years various armed campaigns took place, particularly within Northern Ireland or along the border with the Republic, with the aim of bringing about a united Ireland. The most violent of these and most costly in terms of human lives lost, often referred to as ‘the Troubles’, lasted from the late 1960s until the Good Friday/Belfast Agreement in 1998.

Many of the divisions that resulted from partition, particularly between Catholic and Protestant communities, but also from the Civil War, became institutionalised in Irish society, and the residue of feelings on all sides from these more recent parts of our history is still with us and needs to be discharged and healed.

Northern Ireland

For those of us who live in Northern Ireland, a major feature of our society for three decades was warfare (also known as ‘the Troubles’). This experience of armed conflict has left a legacy of hurt, fear and division in society. There was a brutalisation of everyday lifethat is characterised by desensitisation to violence, higher levels of domestic abuse, struggles with mental health, suicide, and addictions.

Childhood was often steeped in secrecy and suspicion. Some of us were taught to be quiet and nice as a survival tactic. It can also feel like we constantly need to be ready for action.

There can be a feeling that no one understands us and that our oppression restimulates other people, particularly Irish people living in the Republicwho largely did not want to get involved in or engage with ‘the Troubles’. However, the need for people to tell their stories and be listened to respectfully is an important part of the healing process.

Internalised Oppression

One of the most damaging effects of oppression is the way in which it gets internalised. Particularly for older generations of indigenous Irish, internalised oppression is reflected in a variety of ways, including those listed below. However, this is not a definitive list, and the form of the internalised oppression may vary from one generation to another, for Irish people raised abroad, and for Irish people with other significant social identities. This is one of the areas where more work is required to clarify such differences.

One of the difficulties posed by internalised oppression is that its effects become identified with, and confuse people about, what it means to be Irish. So, for example, behaviours such as the abuse of alcohol or images of ‘the fighting Irish’ that people have interpreted as inherent characteristics of being Irish are actually a feature of internalised oppression and have nothing to do inherently with being Irish.

Low Self-Esteem

This shows up as feelings of inferiority, insignificance, stupidity, over-concern with how others see us, feeling ashamed of other Irish people, having low expectations for ourselves, devaluing the Irish language or culture, accepting stereotypes of Irish people, demeaning ourselves, or other negative feelings. Sometimes, we see this in comments people make about themselves personally. At other times, the comments will be about Irish people as a whole or about particular groups of Irish people.

One particular form that this can take is a rigid, reactive pride in the endurance of oppression over many centuries rather than a relaxed pride in what is special about us as a people. In this way, we define ourselves in relation to our oppression rather than our humanness.

Depending on the context, these feelings may lead Irish people in other countries either to keep a low profile and try to be invisible or alternatively adopt a high profile but with a rigid, sometimes romanticised, pride in being Irish.

Powerlessness and Hopelessness

People who have been repeatedly suppressed and defeated internalise that they are powerless to change anything. For individual Irish people, the seeds of powerlessness lie in the historical experience of being colonised and subjected to harsh violence and domination. These historical defeats are reinforced by the many defeats of early childhood, especially where violence has been used against us and also the defeats we saw on the faces of people around us. As a result, we feel too small, too weak, too vulnerable, too scared, or too inadequate to challenge or resist the oppression.

Often, as well as feeling powerless we also feel hopeless about the possibility of succeeding in changing things. This may show up as apathy, expectations of defeat, resistance to taking any initiative, depression, attempts to appease oppressor groups, or other reactions that leave people stuck in the middle of the oppression. One particular way this can be seen is in the tendency for people to complain about what’s wrong without doing anything constructive to try and change things.

While there may be situations where violence is a necessary response to oppressive abuse, one particular effect of powerlessness is seeing violence as the only way of achieving our aims. In this sense, powerlessness breeds violence and it is useful to see this violence as an expression of powerlessness.

Divisiveness

One of the effects of the internalised oppression is to divide people into opposing factions or cause us to see other Irish people as the enemy. Instead of uniting in a common struggleto end divisions and injustices and bring people closer together, we end up blaming each other or fighting among ourselves.

Religious divisions have been one significant form of this in Ireland but it operates along the lines of other oppressions also, for example, classism, racism, and sexism. There have been many occasions when the divisiveness has been actively reinforced from outside to help maintain the oppression but even without any active outside intervention there is a pull for people to split because of the internalised oppression.

Attacking of Leaders

Anyone who steps up to take leadership or becomes visible as a leader risks being attacked by other Irish people. Possibly because of the low self-esteem, it can be difficult for people to believe in or support one of our own who goes against the stereotype that has been internalised and tries to bring about change.

This dynamic is sometimes justified on the basis that the leader is incompetent or making mistakes. However, where we see a repeated pattern of leaders being attacked or ‘done in’, what we are looking at is a pattern of internalised oppression rather than an individual failing. Irish history provides many examples of this dynamic.

Devaluing Our Thinking

Possibly because of the low self-esteem, there is a tendency for Irish people to mistrust or not value our own thinking or the thinking of other Irish people. The thinking of outsiders sometimes carries more weight than the thinking of Irish people.

Survival Behaviour

Over time, people develop various strategies intended to help them survive that, unfortunately, tend to leave the oppression intact. Such strategies include different types of addiction that either distract people from the oppression or leave them numb to its effects. Or they include strategies that try to lessen the likelihood of being targeted by the oppression such as appeasement behaviour or assimilation. And they include finding ways to collude with or manipulate the oppressive system so as to ensure an individual’s survival or prosperity or perhaps the survival or prosperity of their immediate family, while leaving other people to suffer.

One particular form of survival behaviour is seeking relief from the oppression by finding other groups to oppress, for example, immigrants or Travellers. We saw earlier how Irish people played a role in the colonisation of other peoples and survival behaviour also left them vulnerable to taking on a racist role when they emigrated to countries such as the United States. Like all forms of survival behaviour this, of course, leaves the broader oppression intact.

It is clear that Irish liberation involves identifying the forms that internalised oppression takes within different age and other social groups and discharging any feelings attached to these. It also means taking pride and deciding to contradict and act outside any feelings of insignificance, inferiority, or divisiveness. In addition, it means facing the places where we have taken on oppressor roles in relation to women, Travellers, Black and minority ethnic groups, working people, LGBTQ+, Jews, or other oppressed groups.

Roman Catholics

The close identification of the Roman Catholic religion with Irishness arose for very specific historical reasons. Early Irish Christianity, from the 6^th Century onwards, became well-known for its passion, its ascetism, its love of nature, its learning, and its books. Viking raids on monasteries in the 8^th-10^th centuries did not alter the Christianity of the native people and Irish Christianity was largely unaffected during the early centuries of Anglo-Norman colonisation.

This changed with the Protestant Reformation, starting in the 16^th Century, when the colonisers largely became Protestants. A sense of Protestant superiority and a fear of Catholicism added a religious dimension to the oppression: it gave another ‘reason’ for atrocities such as themassacres by Cromwell’s English Puritan Army in 1649-52.

As part of the suppression of the ancient Gaelic culture and social system, laws (such as the Penal Laws) were enacted at various points that specifically outlawed the religion and excluded Roman Catholics from equal civil rights. These laws and later pronouncements from English politicians and in the English media suggested that Irish Catholics were less civilised, less intelligent, and less human than other people thus ‘justifying’ brutal violence and attempted domination.

One effect of the oppression of Catholics was to give Roman Catholic institutions a powerful position among the people. Strong support for, and strict adherence to, the Church had a form of survival value in the context of Irish oppression. This reinforced the tendency to equate being Irish with being Catholic and the consequent alienation of people of other or no religious affiliation.

Many Catholics carry internalised feelings of guilt and insignificance. For others, there is also a lot of anger towards the institutional church. At one extreme, this leads to unquestioning acceptance and obedience and, at the other extreme, to a rejection of every part of our Catholic heritage. More recent experiences of child sexual abuse, and greater awareness of sexism and male domination among clergy and religious, have added to anger at, and rejection of, the institutional church.

The abuse scandals have some of their roots in misinformed and restricted practices around human contact, intimacy, and sex. Children were a target, especially in church-run institutions where their parents assumed they would be safe. Being a patriarchal church, of course, its approach was deeply affected by sexism and male domination. Challenging sexism and male domination, homophobia, and anti-Semitism remains a key struggle affecting all Catholics.

Separately from the painful emotion and experiences of oppressive behaviour, the Catholic religion also offered us a reminder of our goodness as made in the image of God. It also gave us a sense of connection to people all over the world and a concern for their well-being. It was held out that the greatest thing we could do was, in a positive way, to devote our lives to the service of others. However, acknowledging and discharging the racism we have acted out as Irish missionaries in indigenous and global majority cultures is another important part of the work we have to do.

As the numbers of native Irish speakers fell, being Catholic became a simple, if inaccurate, way of identifying indigenous Irish people. This gave the appearance of a religious conflict to the ongoing colonisation, the opposition to it, and especially to the divisions in Irish society that it had caused. The ‘framing’ of conflicts and divisions as a religious struggle that the rest of Europe had long ago left behind, became another ‘reason’ to dismiss difficulties in Ireland as due to intrinsic problems of being Irish, rather than a legacy of oppression. It also became another ‘reason’ to look down on Irish people of whatever background, but especially Irish Catholics, when they emigrated to other English-speaking and largely Protestant countries.

Protestant Peoples

Protestantism in a broad sense was the religion of the colonisers in Ireland. Protestants were brought to Ireland to supplant the native Irish during the various ‘Plantations’ that took place from the 17^thcentury onwards. The Plantation of Ulster, in particular, created a long-term conflict between indigenous people whose lands had been confiscated and the incoming colonisers who now considered they had acquired these lands legally, directly or indirectly, from the English Crown and were determined to hold on to them by whatever means they thought necessary.

Presbyterians, and other Dissenting Protestants, experienced some religious discrimination from the Anglican Protestant establishment in Ireland. They had to pay taxes (‘tithes’) to support the Anglican Church of Ireland. Dissenting Protestants were barred from all public office until the Protestant Dissenter Relief Act of 1780 and their marriages were not recognised as legal until 1842. In addition, from the early years of the Plantation, they were under threat from the indigenous Irish, and their economic development was curtailed to protect economic interests in England. As a result, many emigrated to North America as part of the English-Scottish colonisation there.

In the late 1700s, Ulster Protestants had a leading role in founding a revolutionary movement, the United Irishmen, that looked to form alliances with indigenous Catholics to overthrow English rule in Ireland and create a society with equal rights for all Irish men (though not yet for Irish women), regardless of class or religion.

The subsequent 1798 uprising was defeated and suppressed harshly. The English then took measures to increase Protestant-coloniser cohesion and prevent future alliances with indigenous Catholics. These included the incorporation of Ireland into the ‘United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland’ in 1800, support for organisations like the Orange Order that aimed to promote Protestant superiority and cohesion across class and other divisions, and inculcating a sense of being British rather than Irish. These measures were largely successful in that a critical mass of Ulster Protestantism sought to defend a position of relative superiority and the political links with Britain.

Those of us who are Ulster Protestants may have a sense of being permanently under threat – not only from indigenous Irish, but from betrayal by England. This has led to rigidities in Ulster Protestant culture that can make small compromises look like risking our very existence. It also leads to ongoing and highly visible proclamations and expressions of Britishness and of Protestantism that ‘conservative’ forces in England manipulate and ‘progressive’ forces find unsettling. This in turn leads to a distinctive version of anti-Irish oppression, a ridiculing of Ulster Protestantism that is widespread in mainstream English society and media, without any real acceptance of responsibility for why these rigidities arose.

Protestants elsewhere in Ireland (‘Southern Protestants’ or Anglo-Irish) were largely descended from the English Protestant administrative, judicial, military and commercial establishment in Ireland. These were people who had settled in positions of relative wealth, as landowners or in commerce, in and around Dublin but also scattered throughout the country. Subsequent to Irish independence, Protestants in the ‘South’ of Ireland found ourselves in a Roman-Catholic dominated state. Part of what got internalised in this situation was not drawing attention to ourselves and not making demands.

Protestant internalised oppression contains a number of elements: feelings of superiority over Catholics, fear of Catholics, individualism, not trusting anyone even other Protestants, feeling we are not wanted, feeling we are not fully Irish, uncertainty about our right to be here, fear of losing our home, our land or our lives, fear of being disowned/alienated leading us to stay quiet, rigid defensiveness, self-image based on how hard we work and how successful we are, seriousness and lack of spontaneity, strong sense of duty and loyalty, being well behaved, an emphasis on appearance, difficulty believing in our goodness, feeling stupid and ashamed of ‘thick Prods’, denial that there is a problem or that the Troubles were a war, refusal to address Catholic oppression, collusion, guilt, feeling victimised and acting out martyr or self-righteous patterns.

Taking on an oppressor role in Ireland rested on the colonisers’ own earlier experiences of hurt and oppression. An important part of the work now is to discharge on that historical oppressor role. This has two aspects, acknowledging that role and discharging on it. Because of their different histories, this may look different for Ulster Protestants and for Protestants from the ‘South’ of Ireland. It is likely to include fully claiming Irish identity, recognising that we are an integral long-term part of Irish society, identifying the strengths we have brought to Irish society, identifying where, as Protestant colonisers living in Ireland,wehave been and are oppressed as Irish by English oppressor patterns; and taking on the legacy of our role in the oppression of other Irish people. It will also include taking pride in how, separately from the historical oppressor role, there is also a tradition of Irish Protestants taking a stand on behalf of those who were oppressed.

Other Religious Heritages

Many Irish people, on the island of Ireland andIrish people of the diaspora have other religious heritages (Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Baha'i and others), often through inter-marriage. We have not tried to map out how Irish oppression affects these different religious groups nor how it interacts with internalised oppression based on these other identities. This is yet one more part of the work still to be done.

The Irish Language

Irish, as a spoken language of the people, was the majority language up to 1800 but became a minority language during the 19^th century. The Primary education system introduced at that time prohibited the speaking of Irish and children were punished for speaking the language in school. The Famine in the middle of that century affected a disproportionate number of Irish speakers through death and emigration. During this century also, Irish place names were systematically anglicised with Irish language names being replaced by English namesand so helping to break the connection between the people and the land they lived on.

Internalised oppression played a strong part in the decline of the language. Prominent political and church leaders, for example, saw the language as backward or putting young people at a disadvantage economically, especially those expected to emigrate to England or the USA, and advocated its replacement with English. These attitudes have persisted and, even among some native speakers, people have doubts about the value of the language or the importance of ensuring it remains central in the culture.

Efforts to revive the language began in the later part of the 19^th century. Among others, Protestants played (and continue to play) an important role in attempts to reverse the decline of the language. These included Douglas Hyde who founded the Gaelic League in 1893. This became part of the wider Irish Revival that led to renewed interest in the language and culture of the people andformed a context for the 1916 Rising and the 1919-21 War of Independence.

After partition, the revival of Irish was encouraged and supported in the Free State/Republic. However its main policy, the compulsory learning of Irish in schools combined with the feelings of shame and inferiority attached to the language as a result of internalised oppression, caused many to take an antagonistic stance towards it. Under pressures from the dominance of the English language, the number of native Irish speakers has continued to decline.

In Northern Ireland, the Unionist-dominated government did not provide any support for the language and viewed it both as inferior and unnecessary. They also saw it as a tool for opposition to Partitionand have refused to implement agreed measures to support it. Insulting and mocking references to the language still occur in political discussions.Alongside this, throughout ‘the Troubles’ and since, there has been a revival of interest in Irish language, music and sports in nationalist areas of Northern Ireland, with community-based interest in a small number of Unionist areas also.

An important contradiction here is deciding to reclaim the language and discharge all feelings in the way of celebrating it and becoming fluent in its use.

In recent years there have also been moves to recognise and support Ulster Scots in Ireland. This derived from Lowland Scots, the language of the Scottish Presbyterians who came with the Ulster Plantation. The Good Friday/Belfast Agreement between the UK and Irish Governments promised support for Ulster Scots as ‘part of the cultural wealth of the island of Ireland’.

The small number of people who are fluent in Ulster Scots, and perhaps its history as a language of the colonisers, can make it difficult for Ulster Scots to be respected by other Irish people. But it is now part of the history of Ireland and like all languages under threat it deserves recognition, support and survival.

Sexism and Male Domination

As with other countries, Ireland is a society dominated by male priorities and perspectives. The merger of Church and State had a profound effect on women in both political and religious areas of our lives with little opportunity to escape the combined structural dominance. We are hugely under-represented in positions of power and influence and every day we experience oppression in many forms.

Sexist policies and practice have been the single greatest burden on our lives as females. We could see men benefit where we had lost out. We saw and heard the welcome for a son, and, in Irish folklore, we heard the sympathy expressed when yet another daughter arrived. We witnessed the handing on of land to the sons of our families. We saw also the freedom boys had to do less of the household work.

We noticed the celebration of big families, perhaps with just over a year between the children. There was generally little consideration for the mothers of those children. In Northern Ireland, big families were additionally approved of by some Catholics as a strategy to out-breed Protestants, the oppressive majority in that part of Ireland.

The disapproval of any sexual activity, except within marriage, prompted many of us to be secretive about our intimacy and many decided to marry early simply to fulfil the longing for closeness. There was the expectation that we must be sexually available to our husband at all times because if he ‘strayed’ it would be our fault. Being there for men’s use in the sexual sense is one of the biggest losses for Irish women. We have had our bodies described as ‘occasions of sin’.

The arrival of periods was almost a shameful secret and the secretive handing of packets of sanitary towels from under the shop counter, was a definite signal that this activity was to be hidden and ashamed of. It was never suggested to us that sexuality was a benign gift, that we were in charge of our own bodies and that we could decide what we wanted.

The transition from no sexual contact to birthing many babies was traumatic for many women. The practice of breaking the pelvic bone (symphysiotomy) of some women during childbirth was shocking. This brutal and unnecessary practice was not widely known about until it showed up as a health problem in older women in recent years.

Even in career choice, we were directed to a limited range of jobs in our communities as teachers, nurses, or low-grade civil servants. And, for many years, in many of those jobs,women had to resign on marriage, creating jobs for males who were regarded as more worthy since they were the breadwinners.

In a colonial context, the abuse of women and children by men becomes more pronounced as ways to find a pseudo-power over those people within reach and who are allowed to be dominated by society. And women/mothers, in order to protect ‘their’ men from the colonisers may go silent. As women, we may succumb to ’taking abuse’ or we may ‘take over’ as a response to understanding that ‘our men’ are not ‘capable' of protecting us, of being 'in charge’. Again all inside rigid roles but those were the roles forced on us.

We, as women, may take on an ‘in-charge’ pattern, but having been undone by sexism it isn’t from a sense of the inherent power of being human. Everyone was doing the best they could, but utterly divided. We were all left just trying to survive both the recordings of early abuse and the socially reinforced and institutionalised damage.

Irish Catholic Women

Catholic women in Ireland were born into families and communities heavily influenced by the Roman Catholic Church. Church ceremonies and rituals, such as Christenings, First Communion, and so on, gave a structure to our lives. Childhood, school, teen years, employment, boyfriends, girlfriends, marriage, motherhood, engagement in politics, sport, and community all had a strong Catholic influence.

As late as the 1960s a woman had to go to the church to be blessed (‘Churched’), to make her whole again, after the ‘defilement’ of having a child. And if a baby died before being christened (baptised) it was condemned to be buried outside consecrated ground, away from the public eye.

Females became invisible with no place ’up-front’ in Catholic Church services. Any lay woman who spoke up about female oppression in the Church or who had an opinion beyond Church teaching that she might be brave enough to communicate to the media risked being heavily criticized or ostracized.

Changes are happening for Catholic women in Ireland due to the influence of the international women’s movement, civil rights awareness internationally, and the building of contacts outside the island, especially with the European Union. Contraception, divorce, abortion, and marriage equality have all come on the statute books in the last generation. The sexual abuse scandals of the Church have been exposed and the oppression of young women in church-run institutions has been brought to light. Additionally, many of the religious women who headed up our schools were trailblazers, with a perspective beyond the responsibility of rearing children. They encouraged girls to succeed in careers and provided opportunities for them beyond the limited and expected roles that their mothers and grandmothers had played.

We can be ourselves in the company of other Irish Catholic women. There is a sense of kindness and caring about each other. We build long-term friendships with each other as there is an understanding of each other’s issues that goes deep and produces a tangible warmth. We are smart and speak from the heart, ready to fight for causes we believe in. We have been reared with an awareness and conscience about the lives of our neighbours. We are welcoming of people and have a compassion for minorities or those who may be left out. The broader population benefits from the courage and integrity of Irish Catholic women. In spite of sexism and male domination, we have not only survived but thrived.

Irish Protestant women

Protestant women in Ireland were raised in a variety of Protestant homes – Church of Ireland, Presbyterian, Methodist, etc. There was often a strictness where traditionally the man was head of the family. He made all major decisions, usually without discussion or consideration of other family members. This could lead to resentment and secrecy. Many of us older women now remember growing up and watching our mothers in subservient and compliant roles, deferring to the wishes and decisions of their husbands. Growing up as a girl in a strict Protestant family meant always putting others first, and especially the men and boys.

Those of us who took on a stronger, more assertive role were criticised and, if this came from other women, it demonstrated our internalised sexism.

Sunday was not a day for enjoyment or fun (particularly in Presbyterian households). The order of the day was Sunday school and church once or twice. Television and games were put away, even knitting was frowned upon! Shops, cinemas and pubs were closed.

Until 1965 children’s playgrounds were closed on Sundays in parts of Northern Ireland and swings were chained up so that they could not be used. Times have changed somewhat since then with a move towards equality and many more people turning towards a more secular society. There are also more integrated schools in recent years, where different religious backgrounds are respected.

Women worried about keeping up appearances and about what others such as their neighbour would think. This caused many of us to be overly house-proud - excessive house cleaning and tidying. Secrecy also prevailed. Phrases such as‘Don’t wash your dirty linen in public’ and ‘Whatever you say, say nothing’ were common.

In spite of sexism, we Irish Protestant women are good, resourceful, kind and supportive of each other. This can clearly be seen in our families where sisters, mothers and grandmothers help and support each other. During the 30 years of warfare or ‘the Troubles’ in Northern Ireland, it was mainly women who formed community groups and supported each other and their families, holding communities together. This can still be seen in active local women’s groups in working class areas.

Irish Men

Those of us from older generations got the message as we grew up that the best thing we could possibly do was to die for Ireland in the cause of freedom. It was held out that we would not win, but we might die heroically, and people would write songs about us and tell stories about what we did.

For many of us, Irish history felt like a history of defeat. The various failed uprisings were either sold out by informers or spies or they were defeated by overwhelming force. And there was no significant history of allies coming to the defence of Irish people. At various times, French or Spanish armies were sent to help, but they were defeated or were too small to have any major impact. There was no consistent foreign support. So, as Irish men we have low expectations of support or having allies.

Given that we could never win, some of us found ways to manipulate the system and resist authority with small victories at an individual or community level for our own personal gain. This led to a pattern of not being direct and not acting with integrity. Sometimes, this would lead to exploiting other Irish people, reflected in references to the ‘gombeen man' or the ‘chancer’.

In our struggle to not feel bad about ourselves,some of usturn to alcohol, gambling or other addictions. The ability to drink a lot, in particular, became a source of pride despite the damage it did.

The harshness of our lives as men was reflected also in a layer of violence that lay just beneath the surface and that would emerge, for example, when we drank alcohol. In school, we were subjected to high levels of violence within the classroom. We were regularly caned or beaten with leather straps or fists. School was often a source of terror and shame. There was also violence in the home. Parents were considered bad parents if they didn't hit their children to make them behave properly. As boys, we were also encouraged to play war games, play with guns, and other types of violent role-playing.

Because there were few opportunities to discharge, we learned not to talk about our feelings or experiences, to keep everything in. We submerged our feelings in drink or acted them out with violence towards women and children, or other men. The harshness we faced, the isolation, and the suppression of our feelings underpinned and held in place the oppression of women, in particular.

There was an expectation that we would have to emigrate to find work. Some men never came back. Some ended up alone and isolated on the streets of London or other big cities abroad. They worked hard lives on building sites or tunnels with little to look forward to. Many lost contact with their families as they got older and, again, one of the pieces of solace on offer was alcohol.

In the past, a large number of men were drawn to religion and the priesthood. Many volunteered to serve other oppressed people in different countries. But this was often in the context of a very severe and austere religion and church. And while many did good work, for some, their influence was exerted rigidly and oppressively. Loneliness and isolation were part of the struggle faced by many men and, for some, this was reflected in alcohol abuse or the abuse of women and children.

For younger generations, much has changed. Corporal punishment is now illegal. We have experienced Irish people’s successes in international sport, entertainment, politics, academia, and social change. Many Irish people have set high standards and been inspirational for people of other countries. So, we don’t carry the same levels of shame or self-doubt as older generations.

The message about dying for Ireland has been replaced by a more positive one of making a difference in the world. For some of us, the old message has been replaced by one that encourages us to be successful in business, sport, entertainment, or the arts, make money, or become famous. This, of course, also encourages us to buy into the inequalities of a class-based society. The prevalence of social media has introduced new sources of influence and stress into our lives as younger men and exposure to pornography is widespread.

In spite of this internalised oppression of men, we Irish men have managed to hang on to many special qualities. There is a warmth, a kindness, a softness, a willingness to help, to be there for people, a sense of humour, an ability to sing and tell stories, a love of nature, and a creativity that was expressed particularly in writing. We have retained much of our spontaneity, our ability to discharge, our ability to laugh, and our ability to connect with other people, especially other people who had been colonised or oppressed in other ways.

We deserve to feel proud of the people and the places we come from, and of how well we have done to pass on as little of our own hurts as we could manage to others. The challenge we face is to accept the responsibility of ridding ourselves of our oppressor material and build close, supportive relationships with other Irish men and women.

LGBTQ+

The idea of a specific identity based on sexual feelings or activities is a modern one. The oppression of people engaged in ‘non-approved’ sexual activities is not. (It is notable, however that earlier Gaelic Ireland was quite tolerant and accepting of diverse sexualities).

The death penalty for buggery was in place in England, Wales and Ireland from the 1500s until 1861. In 1885 the offence of gross indecency was introduced and applied throughout England, Wales, Scotland and Ireland. This only applied to male homosexual activity – lesbianism was never criminalised reflecting the sexism that does not recognise female sexuality. When the southern part of Ireland became independent from England the existing oppressive laws on homosexuality were inherited. In 1967 when the UK Parliament voted to decriminalise sex between two consenting males in private, this applied to England and Wales but not to Northern Ireland.

The situation for LGBTQ+ in Ireland, North and South, was one of fear and secrecy. Gay men faced harassment from the police or Gardai and the oppressive laws and attitudes were strongly reinforced by the Catholic church and the evangelical Protestant churches in the North and South.

Irish LGBTQs have the Irish internalised oppression issues set out earlier in this draft policy - low self-esteem, powerlessness, attacking leaders and so on, but as LGBTQ+ the social disapproval and discrimination from an early age can reinforce and duplicate the Irish internalised oppression.

Sexual activity is the excuse or ‘justification’ for the oppression, but oppressive attitudes towards LGBTQs start long before any sexual activity. Rigid gender rules of what boys or girls do and don’t do are used from an early age to channel everyone into a heterosexual norm. The punishment, social and physical, for not conforming can be severe. Many LGBTQ+ people grow up feeling different and somehow bad. This external oppression comes from society at large but also from the immediate family increasing the sense of isolation. For many LGBTQ+ people, this isolation becomes chronic and leads to secrecy and a pull towards addictions to feel better. The feelings that LGBTQ+ people have of not belonging, of being different, and of being bad cannot be overestimated. This is the case even if it is disguised by an exaggerated sense of superiority that many LGBTQ+ people adopt as a defence against the oppression.

In the 1970s, gay men began to organise against the oppressive laws and cases were raised in the European Court of Human Rights. In 1981 the Court ruled against the UK government and in 1988 the Court ruled against the Irish government. However, the laws were not changed until 1982 and 1993. The Catholic church and the evangelical Protestants strongly opposed the reforms. The Democratic Unionist Party organised a ‘Save Ulster from Sodomy’ campaign in Northern Ireland. This led to the UK government abandoning any plan to reform the Northern Ireland laws until forced to do so by the EU.

In the 1990s Southern Ireland changed dramatically, economically and socially, and the situation for LGBTQs was transformed with dramatic changes to the law in the next decades. In 2011 the first openly gay TDs were elected to the Dail and also the first openly lesbian senator was elected. Civil partnerships were recognised in 2010 and in 2015 a referendum took place on gay marriage with 62% in favour. Since July 2015, transgender people in Ireland can self-declare their gender in passports, driving licences, new birth certificates, and when getting married. In 2017 the laws were amended to allow same-sex couples to adopt children. At this time also, Ireland elected the first openly gay Taoiseach.

In Northern Ireland,the Catholic and Protestant churches opposed any changes in the law. In spite of this however, social attitudes were changing and the UK government voted through law reform to allow same-sex marriage in Northern Ireland in January 2020.An indication of the social change that has taken place is the annual Gay Pride march. In 1991 the first march attracted 100 people in Belfast. In 2019, 65,000 marched through Belfast in a display of gay pride and acceptance of diversity.

In the 1980s and 1990s at the height of the oppressive laws and attitudes there was a strong community of LGBTQ+ in RC, North & South. As the social and legal situation has improved, the number of LGBTQ+ people in RC has declined. There are currently few LGBTQ+ in the Northern and Southern Ireland RC communities. There may be many reasons for this decline but if this is to change the heterosexual counsellors in the North and South will need to discharge their oppressor material to enable them to function as better allies.

Classism

The history of Irish oppression can also be seen as a history of class oppression. The initial Norman conquest of Ireland and later English domination took place within the context of the feudal system. This gradually saw the imposition of that system in Ireland, replacing the native clan system.

During this period, a new ruling class of aristocrats, landlords, and a Protestant ascendancy dispossessed the native Irish and reduced them to an impoverished class with very little power or resources. All of this was reinforced by various anti-Irish and anti-Catholic laws.

Revolts and uprisings for part of this time included attempts by this ruling class and later a new middle class of merchants and smaller Catholic landowners to secure their place within the English establishment. They were concerned with reducing the inequalities between Ireland and Britain, increasing the political power of the ruling class in Ireland, and removing the economic barriers to Irish traders and landlords. They were not centrally about ending oppression for Irish people as a whole.

At a later stage, the struggle for independence and the ongoing struggle for a united Ireland did prioritise the ending of English domination but often without a clear perspective on the class issues at the heart of the oppression. However, at other times, class issues did come to the fore in this struggle. Particularly in the 19^th century, with the Young Ireland movement and the Land War, and into the early 20^th century, class was central for many activists. Some even saw that the natural allies for Irish people were the English working class. During this period also, women’s issues were highlighted. Overall, however, the ending of class oppression, women’s oppression and other oppressions would come to be seeneither as non-priority issues or issues to be addressed finally only when national liberation had first been achieved.

At this point, the economic system in both Northern Ireland (as part of the United Kingdom) and the Republic (as part of the European Union) is based firmly within a capitalist model. Inequalities of class permeate society north and south and the inability of the economic system to resolve the climate emergency underscores the necessity for change.As in the past, ending classism is still not a priority issue for most elected politicians and legislation aimed at eliminating inequality does not include class as one of the categories covered.

Ultimately our liberation, not to mention the survival of humanity, must overcome the divisions that capitalism promotes, put an end to classism, and seek a more rational and humane economy.

Emigration

Emigration has been a very significant part of the Irish experience for hundreds of years. For people on the island, it has generally been experienced as a loss, with large numbers of people feeling they had no option but to leave their families and their people. At the same time, however, it also has given rise to a huge influence of Irish people in other countries.

In some cases, emigration was directly enforced as people were transported into bonded servitude in other colonies for alleged crimes, often resistance to oppression. Mostly however people left in hope of making a new life in a new country, which sometimes seemed the only way forward. Many were going to Irish communities in other countries, to family and neighbours who had left before them and maybe had sent back money so that they could travel. In general, people left with feelings undischarged and went on to be busy with a new life, without room to mourn. The feelings of loss were reflected in the songs and stories of the new emigrant communities.

In more recent times, emigration has become normalised, and many people leave the country in search of opportunities and a better quality of life. Whether forced or chosen, there are many feelings attached to emigration that remain to be discharged, both by those who leave and those who remain.

Irish People in Different Countries

The experience of people who emigrated varied from country to country. Mostly, Irish people emigrated to countries dominated by white, Protestant, English-speaking people and culture and this shaped the experience of the new Irish immigrants.

Irish emigrants in the 19^th century sought refuge in countries where people often refused to acknowledge their humanity and saw them as a separate ethnic group.This is especially so for those who emigrated to Great Britain but existed also in other countries such as USA, Canada and Australia, where the dominant power derived from English Protestant expansion. That oppression was clearest and most severe against indigenous Catholic Irish. Preceded by the institution of slavery, the Irish immigrants to the US, for example, were offered a harsh deal: take the side of other European-heritage people in denying the humanity of Native and African-heritage people and become ‘white’ or continue to be threatened, targeted, and excluded.

For Irish Catholics in English-speaking countries, there was continued oppression, based on religion, poverty, and culture. This often led to immigrant communities that stayed close together, trying to maintain a religion and culture while gaining a foothold in the economics and culture of a new country.

Many Irish worked in low-paid jobs, as servants and manual workers, often doing the dirtiest, most physically-demanding jobs. Their willingness to work for whatever they could get was sometimes seen as undermining the conditions already won by workers in those countries. But a tradition of fighting injustice persisted, and over time the immigrant Irish in many countries also became prominent in the struggles for workers’ and other rights. Many also kept a connection with the ongoing struggles in Ireland, both at a personal level (by sending money home, for example) and at a political level. Irish songs and music were kept alive and became a resource for people back home in Ireland.

For some who emigrated, there was a desperation to conform or at least to pass as 'respectable' and not be associated with very pervasive and demeaning stereotypes of Irishness. Their personal story and family history often remained hidden from and invisible to new friends and new generations of their own family in their new country. This also led to pressure on their children to fully assimilate and be upwardly mobile.

The stress of living in an alien culture while being unemployed, undervalued at work, passed over for promotion, promoted but feeling like an impostor in the role, or seen as potential terrorists often meant that patterns of violence, alcohol abuse, or self-destruction were acted out in the home.

Many emigrants could not afford to, or were too upset by their experiences, to return home. This extreme separation and loss also led to stress and emotional difficulties.

What became thought of as Irish immigrant communities in Protestant-dominated English-speaking countries were largely Irish Catholics, with immigrant Irish Protestants largely becoming invisible over a few generations.There were exceptions such as the Orange Order in parts of England and Scotland and the Scots Irish (or Scotch Irish) in North America. The latter were descendants of Ulster Protestants who emigrated in the 18^th and 19^th centuries and who were prominent in many aspects of the colonisation of North America by white European immigrants. While to a great extent they have been assimilated as ‘American’, to some extent an identifiable Scotch-Irish community and culture remains.

Today, among many of us who emigrated, or who are the children or descendants of emigrants, Ireland and its well-being really matter to us. We may have a variety of feelings to discharge including grief for what was lost and the importance of our connection to being Irish. However, some of us may have an outdated and sometimes romanticised view of Ireland, based on the experience of our ancestors rather than on current reality. We may also have to deal with the claim and internalised feelings that we are not Irish enough and maybe not really Irish at all. So, reclaiming this identity fully is an important part of our liberation.

Ongoing Irish Oppression

Gaining political independence for the 26 counties of the Republic did not mean that Irish oppression was at an end. In the modern world, aspects of the historical oppression remain, such as the occurrence of anti-Irish prejudice experienced by Irish people in Great Britain and the disregard for the impact of British policies, such as Brexit, on Irish people, both in Northern Ireland and in the Republic.

The oppression also takes on new forms. The popular culture, values, language, and priorities of what some have called the major Anglosphere powers, particularly Great Britain and the United States, along with their economic power, compete with and often overwhelm native Irish culture, values, language, priorities, and independence. This external influence operates as a form of cultural and, especially, economic colonialism and is much more insidious than the historical, military and settler colonialism.

Anglosphere culture, values, and language come to be seen as superior, more significant, more interesting, more attractive, and more relevant than traditional Irish culture, values, and language. As this becomes internalised, it reinforces the historical internalised oppression that continues to be reflected in the culture.

The challenge of this new form of colonialism is shared with many other indigenous peoples and less powerful or poorer nations. Part of our liberation involves building alliances and close connections with these, our natural allies.

As we saw in the section on Who We Are, as Irish identity becomes more diverse, Irish oppression also takes on new forms over and above the historical oppression of indigenous Irish. Identifying and discharging these new forms of oppression in addition to the forms of current oppression referred to in this section are part of the ongoing work of Irish liberation.

Allies

On a few occasions, French and Spanish armies were sent to aid the cause of Irish freedom from England. In more recent times, the support of US people and of the European Union has been important in achieving peace in Ireland. It is also the case that our internalised oppression has left many of us with low expectations of having allies. The winning of allies, however, is a key part of the liberation process for any oppressed group.

Allies can be meaningfully involved in Irish Liberation in various ways. One is to learn something about our history, geography, and culture. It helps if they can become friends with individual Irish people and are able to show kindness towards us. They can help us build on the strengths of Irish culture, share its wisdom, and heal from the effects of historical and possibly current anti-Irish oppression.

It is helpful if counsellor allies have relaxed thoughtfulness in counselling us on issues such as our intelligence and our significance, on violence and our fears of violence (being targeted or targeting others), on addictions and other damaging effects of genocide and poverty, and on the significance to the Irish person of fully claiming an Irish identity. It is also helpful if they can be relaxed around religion and religious identity and around belief systems that may or may not be as widespread as they once were. They can remind us to take care of ourselves as we commit to others while not reducing that commitment as we do so. This may include being flexible around us as we deal with crises in our lives. They can remember and also remind us that RC is a tool for better living and work cooperatively with us as we apply it to our Irish liberation work and to our lives.

Allies can also play a very useful role when Irish people act out divisiveness or attacks on leaders. This is best done by allies who have already built good relationships with Irish people. It is both a good challenge and a very rewarding experience for a non-Irish person to ‘do the work’ to become such an ally.

For English and US allies, in particular, deciding to work on their English or US identity and the associated oppressor material will make a big difference.

Unity

A goal for many Irish people is to achieve a united Ireland and an end to partition, although many others, especially in Northern Ireland, oppose it.

It is importantto distinguish between political or structural unity and a unity of the people, although these are closely related. Given the deep historical divisions and the threat of violent resistance, it is unlikely that political or structural unity would work without sufficient unity of the people. For this reason, building unity of the people is a key issue for Irish liberation, i.e., an issue that moves everything else forward. All policies and initiatives that are likely to affect Irish society significantly, whether coming from within the island or externally, need to be evaluated in terms of the extent to which they end historical divisions and injustices, and bring people closer together.

Historically, many indigenous societies that have been colonised now include the colonisers and their descendants with their own cultures. In our recent history and currently, Irish society includes the descendants of colonisers along with more recent immigrants with a variety of cultural heritages, hopes and fears. The integration of all these strands of people on our island is a significant but achievable challenge.

The Reality About Us

Unlike what the oppression says about us, Irish people, like all humans, are inherently significant, worthwhile, and good. Among other qualities that our culture has nurtured, we are intelligent, brave, creative, friendly, warm, and loving. These qualities are reflected in our art, our literature, our music, our language, and our relationships.

We have made, and continue to make, significant contributions to the well-being and liberation of people throughout the world.

Although we come from a small island on the edge of Europe, Irish liberation has great significance in the struggle of all groups for liberation. We have a valuable perspective on colonialism and imperialism and on the overcoming of divisions. We also understand clearly the importance of people from the US and England (and other colonial or imperial powers) working on their oppressor history while appreciating the true goodness of their own peoples.

Our Vision

Together with our allies, our aim is to create a society where all Irish people, on the island of Ireland and elsewhere, are committed to each other’s liberation with full respect for the diversity of culture, language, religion, and tradition that characterises our people.

We aim to create a peaceful society with justice and safety for all without fear of attack or threat to life. We recognise that there are no inherent conflicts of interest between any individuals or groups of Irish people. The attacking of other Irish people is always rooted in distress and a reflection of our oppression and internalised oppression.

We acknowledge the richness of the diversity that exists among us and aim to have an inclusive, respectful acceptance of all groups that inhabit the island of Ireland or that identify as Irish, wherever they live. This perspective allows ‘Irishness’ to be defined within a pluralist context that incorporates and takes delight and pride in all existing traditions. We are committed to supporting other Irish people with different traditions from our own and to celebrating and reclaiming all that is valuable and rich in our respective heritages.

Drawing on what we have learned from our own struggles, we aim to be a model to the world of how to deal with all divisive social issues, including classism, racism, sexism, anti-Semitism, gay oppression, ableism, ageism, xenophobia, and sectarianism. Paying attention to the reality of all people’s humanness is a key element in resolving such issues.

We aim to work closely with people everywhere, especially the working class, towards achieving these aims. Having a wide vision that challenges all oppressions and all institutions that perpetuate inhuman policies is a strong basis for building alliances. We recognise the particular opportunity that Irish people in other countries have in building alliances in support of our aims.

Polasaí Saoirse na nÉireannach mí na Nollag 2023

Is éard is polasaí saoirse ann ná cur síos ar na bealaí is féidir le grúpa a ndearnadh leatrom orthu saoirse a bhaint amach. Cuimsíonn sé mionsonraí maidir le conas a fheidhmigh an leatrom agus é inmheánaithe laistigh den ghrúpa, ráitis shoiléire maidir le céard is fíor ó nádúr faoi na daoine seo, na cáilíochtaí daonna atá tábhachtach agus a chothaítear ina gcultúr agus na meonta, dearcaí agus straitéisí atá lárnach chun saoirse a bhaint amach.

Ag leibhéal an duine aonair, baineann próiseas an tsaoirse le scaoileadh mothúchán a chuireann srianta orainn, bród asainn féin a aiséileamh, dlúthchaidrimh a thógáil, dearcaí ar son daoine atá bunaithe ar léargas soiléir na fírinne a chur chun cinn, ag gníomhú i mbealaí in aghaidh an leatroim, lena n-áirítear lucht tacaíochta a mhealladh, agus céimeanna nithiúla a thógáil chun deireadh a chur leis an leatrom. Leagtar amach sa pholasaí seo conas a oibreodh sé seo go réalaíoch d’Éireannaigh.

Ar deireadh, fearacht polasaithe eile an Chomhphobail Chomhéisteachta Athmheasúnaithe (CA), is dréachtpholasaí é seo. Agus muid ag teacht ar thuiscint níos doimhne ar leatrom na nÉireannach agus conas a théarnamh uaidh, leasófar é agus cuirfear feabhas air. Idir an dá linn, soláthraítear leis léargas úsáideach agus forbhreathnú dár smaointeoireacht reatha faoi shaoirse na nÉireannach.

Cé Atá Ionann

Cuimsíonn pobal na hÉireann meascán saibhir daoine a rugadh ar oileán na hÉireann chomh maith lena sliochtaigh agus daoine eile a bhog nó a tháinig ar imirce go dtí an t-oileán go sealadach nó go buan.

Chun críche éisteachta maidir le saoirse Éireannach, áirítear le daoine Éireannach iad siúd a rugadh ar oileán na hÉireann agus a sliochtaigh beag beann ar aicme, cultúr, creideamh, cúlra eitneach, an áit sa domhan ina gcónaíonn siad, nó difríochtaí eile. Cuireann muid daoine a fhulaing leatrom frith-Éireannach san áireamh, beag beann ar a gcúlra nó a bhféiniúlachtaí eile. Agus cuireann muid daoine san áireamh a rugadh ar an oileán agus a thógann oidhreacht nó féiniúlacht Bhriotanach dóibh féin (agus dá sliochtaigh) a chinneann go bhfuil féiniúlacht Éireannach acu freisin.

Tá daoine eile againn a bhfuil féiniúlacht Éireannach faighte againn, muid a tugadh saoránacht Éireannach dúinn, mar shampla, ach níl taithí leatroim Éireannaigh stairiúil nó inmheánaithe againn. Is féidir, áfach, go bhfuil tionchar indíreach orainn ag an leatrom Éireannach inmheánaithe inár gcultúr atá timpeall orainn nó go bhfuil streachailt againn maidir le comhshamhlú nó chun fáilte a fháil ó Éireannaigh eile. Is féidir go bhfuil taithí againn le ciníochas, seineafóibe nó drochíde eile.

Le haghaidh daoine ag a bhfuil féiniúlacht Shasanach nó de chuid na Stát Aontaithe, go háirithe iad siúd a chuireann fúthu in Éirinn agus a ghlacann le féiniúlacht Éireannach, bainfidh cuid thábhachtach na hoibre comhéisteachta a dhéanann siad le hábhar ansmachta atá nasctha leis na féiniúlachtaí eile sin a scaoileadh amach.

Is dúshlán é atá bainteach leis an obair seo ná sábháilteacht agus spás a chruthú sa chaoi go bhféadann muid na mothúcháin a bhaineann le bheith inár nÉireannaigh a scaoileadh amach agus sochaí ionchuimsitheach atá saor ó leatrom a chruthú.

Éagsúlacht ár nOidhreachtaí

Ní thuigtear ár réamhstair go hiomlán ach cuimsíonn sí ceangail le daoine thuaisceart na hEorpa agus réigiúin Mheánmhuirí.

Áirítear linn daoine de shliocht áitritheoirí bunaidh an oileáin agus grúpaí a tháinig níos déanaí amhail na Lochlannaigh, na Normannaigh, na hÚgónaigh, na hAlbanaigh, na Sasanaigh, na Breatnaigh, na Sínigh, na Nigéaraigh, na Vítneamaigh, na hIndiaigh, na Pacastánaigh, na Rómánaigh, na Liotuánaigh, na Laitviaigh, na Polannaigh, na hEastónaigh, na Romaigh, na Siriaigh, agus náisiúntachtaí éagsúla eile.

Chomh maith leis sin tá go leor oidhreachtaí reiligiúnacha éagsúla inár measc lena n-áirítear Caitlicigh Rómánacha, Protastúnaigh (Anglacánaigh, Preispitéirigh, Baistigh, Modhaigh, baill de Chumann na gCarad agus eile), Giúdaigh, Moslamaigh, Hiondúigh, Bahá’ígh, daoine ó chreidimh éagsúla eile, agus daoine a thugann le fios gur aindiachaithe iad, agus daoine gan féiniúlacht chreidimh ar bith.

Féiniúlacht

Tá sé úsáideach aon fhéiniúlacht seachas féiniúlacht daonna a mheas mar atá sé fréamhaithe i mothúcháin phianmhara agus i leatrom. Glacann muid féiniúlacht Éireannach chugainn ag an bpointe seo mar uirlis ionas gur féidir linn an crá agus an leatrom atá ceangailte leis a scaoileadh amach. Is amhlaidh an cás freisin go léireoidh an fhéiniúlacht saintréithe daonna tábhachtacha. Agus an obair scoilte seo á déanamh againn, treiseofar ár nasc leis na saintréithe daonna sin. Sa deireadh, tá muid saor ansin fáil réidh leis an bhféiniúlacht agus saol níos lán-daonna a chaitheamh.

Agus muid á glacadh, aithníonn muid nach rud aonchineálach ná gan athrú í an fhéiniúlacht Éireannach. Tá sí éagsúlacht agus athraíonn sí le himeacht ama. San am a caitheadh, chonacthas an fhéiniúlacht seo (agus cuireadh steiréitíopaí uirthi) mar shraith gnéithe a mheastar gur “Éireannach” go huathúil agus go lárnach í (mar shampla an Ghaeilge, ceol Gaelach, an Caitliceachas Rómhánach agus araile). Uaireanta, chonacthas na gnéithe seo mar riachtanais dosheachanta na féiniúlachta. Le fírinne, áfach, ní bhaineann féiniúlacht Éireannach le haon traidisiún creidiúnach, eitneach nó náisiúnta amháin agus tá réimse leathan oidhreachtaí ina measc.

Ní chuireann glacadh féiniúlacht Éireannach bac ar dhaoine féiniúlachtaí náisiúnta eile a ghlacadh chucu féin. In CA, fuair muid go mbíonn sé fiúntach gach aon fhéiniúlacht atá againn a ghlacadh go hiomlán (100%), ár bhféiniúlachtaí náisiúnta san áireamh. Fágann sé go bhfuil gach duine Éireannach chomh Éireannach le gach duine Éireannach eile. Is féidir féiniúlacht Éireannach agus féiniúlacht Mheiriceánach a ghlacadh chugainn féin go hiomlán, nó féiniúlacht Éireannach agus féiniúlacht Bhriotanach, nó féiniúlacht Éireannach agus féiniúlacht Nigéarach, nó meascán féiniúlachtaí ar bith a bhfuil cuid d’oidhreacht an duine. Sa bhealach céanna gur féidir le hÉireannaigh féiniúlacht Éireannach agus féiniúlacht Mheiriceánach araon a ghlacadh chucu, níl aon coinbhleacht dhúchasach nuair a ghlactar féiniúlacht mar Éireannach agus mar Bhriotanach araon.

Éireannaigh Dhúchasacha

Is daoine dúchasacha iad formhór na nÉireannach. Tagraíonn féiniúlacht dhúchasach do dhaoine a cuirtear as seilbh a gcuid talún iad, nó a cuirtear cosc ar a dteanga, a gcreideamh agus a gcultúr, nó a rinneadh cinedhíothú orthu, ina stair nó sa lá atá inniu ann. Cuimsíonn Éireannaigh Dhúchasacha iad siúd atá de shíol ó dhaoine a raibh cuid den sochaí Gaelach, a labhair Gaeilge, Caitliceach den chuid is mó, bunaithe ar chlanna, ar a chloígh agus a dhearna na Normannaigh agus na Sasanaigh coilíniú. Cuimsíonn muid daoine a rugadh ar oileán na hÉireann chomh maith le daoine an diaspóra, idir Éireannaigh geala agus Éireannaigh de dhath. Coinníonn roinnt mhaith againn dlúthcheangal leis an bhfód dúchais, leis an gcultúr, le na daoine agus lenár stair in ainneoin imeallú eacnamaíochta nó polaitíochta agus leithcheal cultúrtha.

Mar Éireannaigh dhúchasacha, tá go leor cosúlachtaí idir muid féin agus pobal dúchais ó thíortha eile agus is mór an leas is féidir linn a bhaint as obair maidir le saoirse na ndúchasach. Murab ionann agus pobail dhúchasacha eile, áfach, is daoine geala muid go bhformhór agus ní daoine an tromlaigh dhomhanda muid. Dá bhrí sin, is cuid thábhachtach bhreise den obair atá le déanamh ag Éireannaigh geala ná ár gcuid ciníochais a dhíbir.

Difríocht amháin eile atá ann idir na hÉireannaigh agus roinnt mhaith pobal dúchasach eile ná nach raibh baint ag an gconcas agus coilíniú luath lenár reiligiúin dhúchasaigh a chur faoi chois. Cé gur dlúthchuid de leatrom roinnt mhaith cultúr dúchasach é cur i bhfeidhm na Críostaíochta, ghlac na hÉireannaigh leis an gCríostaíocht cheana na céadta blianta sular tháinig na coilínithe Críostaí eachtracha. Ón 16ú haois ar aghaidh, áfach, nuair a d’éirigh an Sasana ina thír Phrotastúnach, d’éirigh cur faoi chois an reiligiúin Chaitlicigh dhúchasaigh mar dhlúthchuid den tionscadal coilínithe.

Taistealaithe

Is grúpa eitneach mionlach iad na taistealaithe atá cuid de shochaí na hÉireann leis na céadta. Tá thart ar 32,000 againn ar oileán na hÉireann agus bíonn muid faoi leatrom go trom laistigh den chultúr. Tá na mílte Taistealaithe Éireannacha breise ar fud an domhain.

In Éirinn, bíonn leibhéil dífhostaíochta an-ard againn agus bíonn orainn a streachailt go leanúnach chun áitreabh cuí a fháil. Tá rátaí báis ár naíonán agus féinmharaithe i bhfad níos airde ná an meán náisiúnta, agus tá ár n-ionchas saoil níos ísle. Níl cáilíocht oideachais tríú leibhéal ag ach sciar beag na dTaistealaithe agus ní raibh tacaíocht ón gcóras oideachais lenár rannpháirtíocht go stairiúil. Bíonn ardleibhéil chlaontachta agus leithcheala romhainn laistigh den shochaí Éireannach i gcoitinne.

Áirítear le codanna tábhachtacha chultúr na dTaistealaithe teaghlach sínte, pobal, reiligiún, urraim don aois, ceardaíocht, ceol, seanchas, capaill, carbháin, teanga (Caintis, Gaimis nó Seiltis) agus fánaíocht.

Cé gur thóg líon beag daoine socraithe aonair céimeanna chun bheith ina lucht tacaíochta le haghaidh Taistealaithe, is beag obair atá déanta ag daoine socraithe i gcoitinne maidir lena gcaidrimh le Taistealaithe. I bhfianaise an leatrom forleathan ar na Taistealaithe, is príomhdhúshlán é do dhaoine socraithe a gcuid ábhar ansmachta a scaoileadh amach agus a theacht ina lucht tacaíochta éifeachtach ar ár son. Fágann sé seo gur chóir a aithint nach féidir a fhás aníos i sochaí na hÉireann mar dhuine socraithe gan cuid ar a laghad de na claontachtaí in aghaidh Taistealaithe atá fite fuaite sa chultúr a inmheánú.

Ár dTaithí mar Dhaoine Faoi Leatrom agus mar Thíoránaigh

Agus muid ag aithint agus ag luacháil na gnéithe réasúnacha agus maithe sa mhéid a rinne na daoine uile dár stair ar mhaithe le chultúr agus féiniúlacht na hÉireann, aithníonn agus glacann muid freisin leis an ról a bhí ag an leatrom. Is cuid thábhachtach dár saoirse í an stair seo a thuiscint.

Ag a chroílár, is é forlámhas Sasanach foinse leatrom na nÉireannach ó ré ionradh na Normannach in 1169 go dtí an lá atá inniu ann (mar a fheicfidh muid thíos). Ón 16ú haois ar aghaidh, ba é forlámhas Sasanach Protastúnach an fhoinse lárnach go bunúsach. Agus cumhacht Sasanach Protastúnach ag méadú, cuimsíodh na náisiúin choilínithe Corn na Breataine, an Bhreatain Bheag agus Albain sa tionscadal coilínithe in Éirinn.

Cosúil leis roinnt mhaith náisiúin eile a ndearna Sasana coilíneachas orthu, tá stair shaibhir agus chasta ag na hÉireannaigh agus iad ag cur in aghaidh an choilínithe go gníomhach agus go leanúnach, ar lámh amháin, agus rinne siad rannpháirtíocht go gníomhach i dtionscadal Impireacht na Breataine (in Éirinn agus i dtíortha coilínithe eile araon) ar an lámh eile. Sa chas deiridh sin, tá rannpháirtíocht na nÉireannach ann i méadú míleata, riaracháin, agus tráchtála Impireacht na Breataine (lena n-áirítear rannpháirtíocht i gcinedhíothú daoine dúchasacha eile). Is féidir é sin a thuiscint go háirithe i gcomhthéacs leatrom inmheánaithe agus daoine ag streachailt chun a gcuid leatrom féin a éalú trí róil na dtíoránach a ghlacadh chucu féin.

Aithníonn muid fírinne an mhothúcháin phianmhar a bhaineann lenár stair choilínithe agus iarmhairt deighilte agus péine a bhí á leanúint, agus cé chomh tábhachtach atá sé é a scaoileadh amach. Is éard atá i gceist leis sin ná tionchair an leatroim choilínigh a aithint agus a scaoileadh amach in éineacht le aon ról tíoránaigh a d’imir muid, nó ár sinsir, sa leatrom seo. Is léir ón taithí go n-oibríonn an próiseas níos éifeachtaí a mhéid a chuimhníonn muid ar ár maitheas dúchasach mar dhaoine.

Cé gur baineadh úsáid as difríochtaí reiligiúnacha chun muid a choimeád scartha, aithníonn muid freisin nach é an reiligiún féin bunús na ndeighiltí idir daoine ar an oileán.

Coilíniú agus Plandálacha

Ní féidir stair an oileáin a thuiscint ina iomláine ach amháin i gcomhthéacs próisis leanúnaigh choilíneachais agus a thionchair. Tá sé níos fearr an coilíneachas seo a thuiscint i gcomhthéacs fhorbairt an fheodachais agus níos déanaí an chaipitleachais san Eoraip go ginearálta.

Bhí tionchar suntasach (cé nach raibh sé ollmhór) ag ionsaithe luatha na gcreachadóirí Lochlannacha agus ag bunú lonnaíochtaí Lochlannacha feadh an chósta, sa 9ú agus 10ú haois go príomha, ar shochaí dhúchasach na hÉireann. Sa deireadh, chomhshamhlaigh siad siúd a chuir fúthu ar an oileán sa tsochaí agus sa chultúr a bhí ann cheana.

Coilíniú Normannach na hÉireann, a tosaíodh sa 12ú haois, ba fhreagairt é den chuid is mó ar phatrúin fhorlámhais inmheánaithe laistigh dá gcultúr féin agus ar bhrú an chórais fheodaigh. Éilíodh dá bharr tailte nua a aimsiú chun mic gan talamh na n-uaisle Normannacha a chúiteamh agus a choinneáil gnóthach ionas nach ndéanfadh siad trioblóid ina dtír bhaile.

Thug coinbhleacht idir ríthe dúchasacha na hÉireann an deis do Normannaigh as an mBreatain bonn a bheith déanta acu san oileán in 1169. As rath ionradh na Normannach agus faitís go bhfásadh siad i gcumhacht, tháinig an Rí Sasanach, Henry II, go hÉirinn ina dhiaidh sin (1170-72) chun dílseacht a éileamh ó na huaisle Normannacha agus ó Chinn Fine dhúchasacha na hÉireann.

I gcaitheamh na n-aoiseanna, fuair na Sasanaigh níos mó agus níos mó cumhachta. Bhí na modhanna leatroim dian, leathan, agus brúidiúil go minic. As seo a d'eascair díothú chóras clainne dúchasach na hÉireann i ndeireadh báire agus bhí an lámh in uachtar ag na Sasanaigh ar fud na tíre tar éis Chath Chionn tSáile in 1601 agus ‘imeacht na nIarlaí’ in 1607.

Díbríodh an bunchóras clainne agus an cultúr Gaelach, agus leabaíodh an coilíneachas, trí phróisis éagsúla:

· Sraith ‘plandálacha’ ina gcuireadh na hÉireannaigh dhúchasacha as seilbh an talún agus ina gcuireadh ‘plandálaithe’ as Albain agus Sasana nó saighdiúirí a throid in airm choncais de chuid Shasana ina n-áit. Ba é an ceann ba rathúla é sa 17ú haois nuair a bhí na plandálaithe Protastúnacha as Sasana agus Albain den chuid is mó.

· Athchur córas réadmhaoine príobháidí agus oidhreachta ag an mac is sine in ionad an chórais Ghaelaigh maidir le húinéireacht agus bainistíocht an talún, a bhí comhsheilbheachais, cothromaíoch agus clann-bhunaithe

· Athchur dlí coiteann Sasanach in ionad chóras ársa Dlíthe na mBreithiúna

· Cur faoi chois an reiligiúin Chaitlicigh agus Péindlíthe éagsúla lena gcuireadh srianta diana ar chearta agus ar chumhachtaí na gCaitliceach.

· Concas míleata crua agus gorta agus galar a bhí in éindí leis a bhí ina gcúis ag pointí áirithe le bás líon mór an phobail dhúchasaigh – mná, páistí, agus fir

· ‘Iompar’ chuig coilíneachtaí eile agus gearradh sclábhaíochta faoi bhanna orthu siúd a chuir ina n-aghaidh agus a throid i gcoinne an leatroim nó a fágadh leochaileach iad nó go dtabharfaí i dtír orthu mar gheall ar an leatrom (amhail cleithiúnaithe na bhfear Éireannach a fuair bás i gcath nó ar a cuireadh iallach an tír a fhágáil gan a dteaghlaigh)

· Díothú ar struchtúir pholaitiúla ar leith agus tír amháin a dhéanamh as dhá thír in 1800 chun Ríocht Aontaithe na Breataine Móire agus na hÉireann a chruthú lena raibh an pharlaimint i Londain

· Cur faoi chois na teanga agus an cultúir Éireannaigh

· Leatrom ar thuathánaigh bhochta trí chóras tiarnaí talaimh neamhchónaitheacha, cíosanna crua, agus díshealbhuithe

· Steiréitíopáil agus díspeagadh na nÉireannach amhail is gur daoine barbartha, mímhorálta agus nach fíordhaoine iad ag polaiteoirí agus na meáin chumarsáide Sasanacha

Bhí leibhéil arda eisimirce in éineacht leo seo agus daoine ag iarraidh an leatrom a éileamh agus saol níos fearr a aimsiú dóibh féin i dtíortha eile, Sasana agus na Stáit Aontaithe go príomha. Cuireadh deireadh le roinnt mhaith príomhghnéithe na sochaí thraidisiúnta dhúchais faoi lár na 17ú haois.

Bhí roinnt tionchar ag an bpróiseas coilíneachais seo:

· Leatrom eacnamaíoch dian agus díshealbhú ón talún agus na héifeachtaí iarmhartacha ar shláinte agus fholláine an daonra

· Leatrom polaitiúil dian lenar coinníodh formhór an daonra amach ó chumhacht go córasach

· Leatrom cultúrtha dian lenar cuireadh cosc go crua ar an nGaeilge, ar chultúr Gaelach, agus ar an reiligiún Caitliceach, agus

· Inmheánú an leatroim i bhfoirmeacha éagsúla lena n-áirítear féinmheas íseal, mothúcháin de neamhthábhacht, easpa cumhachta, agus éadóchas, deighilteachas, ionsaithe ar cheannairí, agus deacrachtaí luach a gcuid smaointe a aithint.

Tá fréamhacha a bhaineann le roinnt mhaith deighiltí i sochaí na hÉireann faoi láthair sa phróiseas coilíneachais agus léiríonn siad oidhreachtaí éagsúla an choilínithe agus an phobail choilínithe.

Le críochdheighilt an oileáin (1920-22) ina Phoblacht neamhspleách faoi dheireadh ar a raibh na Caitlicigh Rómhánacha i gceannas agus Tuaisceart Éireann ar a raibh Protastúnaigh i gceannas agus a d’fhan sa Ríocht Aontaithe rinneadh institiúidiú na deighiltí de bhreis idir na traidisiúin éagsúla.

Cé gur féidir leis na hÉireannaigh gnéithe éagsúla a n-oidhreachtaí Lochlannacha agus Normannacha a cheiliúradh, tá an-saothar déanta againn teacht ar dhearcadh soiléir agus roinnte maidir leis an tionchar Briotanach an-mhór. Cé gur léirigh cuid mhór an tionchair seo an leatrom, dála aon chultúr bhí gnéithe dearfacha, ar son an duine freisin, mar shampla, rannchuidiú leis an eolaíocht, an litríocht agus na healaíona. Agus muid ag scaoileadh amach an crá atá bainteach le leatrom na nÉireannach, beidh muid in ann deighilt a dhéanamh idir na gnéithe réasúnacha agus luachmhara inár stair agus na gnéithe neamhréasúnacha agus leatromacha.

An Gorta Mór (nó an tOcras Mór)

Tharla an tréimhse seo d’ollghorta, galar agus eisimirce idir 1845 agus 1852. Faoi na 1840idí, bhí beagnach dhá thrian an daonra ag brath go hiomlán ar an bpráta agus ba é an phríomhfhoinse bia é don chuid eile. Idir 1845 agus 1849, theip ar an mbarr prátaí trí shéasúr as ceithre cinn. Ba é an toradh a bhí ann ná gorta agus galar – dinnireacht, tífeas, agus calar. Le linn na tréimhse seo, is amhlaidh an cás freisin go raibh méideanna móra gráin agus bia eile á n-easpórtáil ón tír.

Fuair ar a laghad milliún duine bás agus chuaigh milliún eile ar imirce, a bhí ina chúis le titim 25% ar a laghad ar dhaonra an oileáin. Maítear i roinnt meastachán gur féidir go raibh an laghdú níos gaire do 50%. Cuireadh isteach ar an daonra dúchasach go géar go háirithe. Rinne an laghdú suntasach sa daonra faoi chúinsí chomh deacracht sin tionchair ollmhóra i dtéarmaí teanga, reiligiúin, polaitíochta, eacnamaíochta, agus gnéithe eile an tsaoil Éireannaigh. D’fhág sé seo iarmhairt mhór mhothúcháin neamhscaoilte.

I seisiúin chomhéisteachta, is é an dúshlán atá ann ná aghaidh a thabhairt do chruas foriomlán stair na hÉireann. D’fhéadfadh sé go mbeadh claonadh ann a iarraidh ‘léim thar’ an méid a tharla in ionad an brón agus an fhearg faoi a scaoileadh amach. Is féidir chomh maith gurb iad na mothúcháin neamhscaoilte i leith na ‘Trioblóidí’ le déanaí an fáth nach dtugann daoine aghaidh ar a mothúcháin faoinár stair níos luaithe. (Ar bhealach comhchosúil, is féidir gurb iad na mothúcháin neamhscaoilte faoinár stair níos luaithe an fáth nach dtugann daoine aghaidh ar a mothúcháin i leith na ‘Trioblóidí’.) Is príomhchuid ár saoirse é ár mothúcháin uile faoinár stair, cibé acu ar tharla sé le déanaí nó níos faide siar, a aithint agus a scaoileadh amach.

Cinedhíothú

Is príomhghné choilíneachais pobal dúchasach ar fud an domhain é an cinedhíothú. D’fhéadfadh sé a bheith i bhfoirm cinedhíothaithe fisiciúil iarbhír agus i bhfoirm cinedhíothaithe cultúrtha freisin. I gcás an chéad chinn, ag roinnt pointí i stair na hÉireann laghdaíodh an daonra go géar, uaireanta de leath, trí mheascán de chogadh, galar agus gorta.

I gcás an Ghorta Mhóir i lár an 19ú haois, chuir Trevelyan, riarthóir sinsearach Briotanach in Éirinn, fáilte roimhe mar chúiteamh tuillte ar an daonra agus leas don gheilleagar. Luaigh sé gur ‘Sheol breithiúnas Dia an tubaiste chun ceacht a mhúineadh do na hÉireannaigh, nár chóir an tubaiste sin a mhaolú an iomarca ... ní hé olc fisiciúil an Ghorta an fíorolc nach mór dúinn dul i ngleic leis ach olc morálta de cháil leithleach, shaobh agus achrannach na ndaoine.’

Cé is moite de ghníomhartha fisiciúla cinedhíothaithe, bhí polasaí leanúnach cinedhíothaithe cultúrtha a raibh mar aidhm aige teanga, reiligiún, traidisiúin, córas sóisialta, córas dlí, agus cultúr na nÉireannach dúchasach a dhíothú.

Cé gur féidir a rá gur fheidhmigh an Gorta Mór mar chineál cinedhíothaithe de bharr fhaillí in ionad rúin d’aon ghnó, inmheánaíodh mar sin taithí gaolmhara amhail cogadh, gorta, galar agus leatrom cultúrtha agus áiríodh mar chinedhíothú iad. Tá sé deacair d’Éireannaigh breathnú ar na taithí seo go mion agus tá an brón agus an fearg a bhaineann leo fós le scaoileadh amach.

Léirítear tionchair chinedhíothaithe i leibhéil arda foréigin agus faitís roimh fhoréigean, féinmharú, féindochar (lena n‑áirítear ‘féinmharú mall’ ó alcól agus ó shubstaintí agus nósanna dochracha eile), agus fadhbanna ‘meabhairshláinte’. Bíonn siad seo coitianta i measc pobail dhúchasacha ar a rinneadh cinedhíothú orthu. Ní cuireann siad isteach ar Éireannaigh ar an oileán amháin, ach ar dhaoine i dtíortha an diaspóra chomh maith.

Críochdheighilt, Cogadh Cathartha, agus na Trioblóidí

D’eascair an Conradh Angla-Éireannach leis na Briotanaigh as Cogadh na Saoirse (1919 – 1921), a lean Éirí Amach 1916. Dheimhnigh an Conradh críochdheighilt na tíre a d’achtaigh parlaimint an RA sa bhliain roimhe sin (1920). D’éirigh Saorstát Éireann (26 Chontae ag a bhfuil tromlach mór náisiúnaithe/ar son na saoirse agus Caitliceach Rómhánach) ina thír ar leith ón Ríocht Aontaithe. (In 1949 tháinig Poblacht na hÉireann as). Lean Tuaisceart Éireann (6 Chontae Ulaidh ag a bhfuil tromlach Protastúnach ar son an Aontais den chuid is mó) mar chuid den Ríocht Aontaithe ar a dtugtar an Ríocht Aontaithe agus Tuaisceart Éireann anois.

Rinneadh críochdheighiltí institiúidithe idir Protastúnaigh Ulaidh agus an chuid eile den oileán, i.e. an Saorstát/Phoblacht. Chruthaigh sé mionlach mór, Caitliceach go príomha, i dTuaisceart Éireann a raibh míshásta leis an RA agus ar a rinneadh leithcheal dian le tacaíocht ón stát.Ní dhearnadh an leithcheal céanna ar Phrotastúnaigh sa Saorstát/Phoblacht agus a rinneadh ar Chaitlicigh i dTuaisceart Éireann. Cheap siad, áfach, go raibh an éiteas Caitliceach agus cumhacht na hEaglaise Caitlicí laistigh den Stát doicheallach agus sriantach agus d'fhág roinnt mhaith acu.

Bhí scaradh i measc na náisiúnaithe Éireannacha mar gheall ar an gConradh agus tháinig cogadh cathartha sa Saorstát dá bharr (1922-23). Sa deireadh, bhuaigh an taobh ar son an Chonartha. D’eitigh Óglaigh na hÉireann (IRA) a bhí in aghaidh an Chonartha críochdheighilt a ghlacadh agus i mblianta ina dhiaidh sin tharlaigh feachtais armáilte éagsúla, laistigh de Thuaisceart Éireann go háirithe, nó feadh na teorann leis an bPoblacht, agus é mar aidhm acu Éire aontaithe a dhéanamh. Mhair na cinn ab fhoréigní agus ba dhaoire i dtéarmaí caillte na ndaoine, dá dtagraítear mar ‘na Trioblóidí’ go minic, ó dheireadh na 1960idí go dtí Comhaontú Aoine an Chéasta/Béal Feirste in 1998.

Rinneadh institiúidiú ar go leor de na deighiltí mar thoradh ar chríochdheighilt, idir pobail Chaitliceacha agus Phrotastúnacha go háirithe, ach ón gCogadh Cathartha freisin, i sochaí na hÉireann, agus tá iarmhairt mhothúcháin linn ar gach taobh ó na codanna níos déanaí dár stair fós agus caithfidh muid iad a scaoileadh amach agus a leigheas.

Tuaisceart Éireann

Maidir linn a chuireann fúinn i dTuaisceart na hÉirinn, is príomhghné dár sochaí le 30 bliain anuas é an cogadh (ar a dtugtar ‘na Trioblóidí’ chomh maith). D’fhág an t-eispéireas coinbhleachta armáilte seo crá, imní agus deighilt sa tsochaí. Bhí brúidiúlacht sa saol ó lá go lá a bhaineann go sonrach le dí-íogrú i leith an fhoréigin, leibhéil drochíde baile níos airde, cathanna le meabhairshláinte, féinmharú, agus andúil.

Bhíodh an óige báite go minic i rúndacht agus drochamhras. Múineadh do chuid againn a bheith ciúin agus deas mar bheart marthanais. D’fhéadfadh sé a aireachtáil gur gá dúinn a bheith réidh i gcónaí le gníomh.

D’fhéadfaí mothúchán a bheith ann nach dtuigeann aon duine muid agus gur údar athspreagtha é ár leatrom do dhaoine eile, Éireannaigh a chónaíonn sa Phoblacht go háirithe nár ghlac páirt ‘sna Trioblóidí’ go bhformhór. Is cuid thábhachtach den phróiseas leighis é, áfach, an riachtanas go n-insíonn daoine a scéalta agus go n-éistear go measúil leo.

Leatrom Inmheánaithe

Ceann de na héifeachtaí leatroim is damáistí is ea an bealach ina n-inmheánaítear é. Le haghaidh glúnta Éireannach dúchasach níos sine go háirithe, léirítear leatrom inmheánaithe i mbealaí éagsúla, lena n‑áirítear iad sin a liostaítear thíos. Ní liosta críochnúil é seo, áfach, agus d’fhéadfadh foirm an leatroim inmheánaithe a athrú ó ghlúin go glúin, d’Éireannaigh a tógadh thar lear, agus d’Éireannaigh ag a bhfuil féiniúlachtaí sóisialta suntasacha eile. Ní mór tuilleadh oibre a dhéanamh sa réimse seo chun na difríochtaí sin a shoiléiriú.

Ceann de na deacrachtaí atá ann le leatrom inmheánaithe ná go measctar suas á éifeachtaí le céard is Éireannach ann, agus cuireann sé mearbhall ar dhaoine faoi. Mar shampla, is gné de leatrom inmheánaithe iad iompraíochtaí amhail mí-úsáid alcóil nó íomhánna den ‘Éireannach troda’ gur bhain daoine ciall as mar bhuntréithe le bheith i d’Éireannach, ach i ndáiríre níl baint ar bith acu le bheith i d’Éireannach.

Féinmheas Íseal

Léiríonn sé seo nuair a thagann mothú ísleachta, neamhthábhachta nó bómántachta orainn, ró-imníoch faoi bhreithiúnais daoine eile orainn, náire orainn faoi Éireannaigh eile, ionchais ísle a bheith againn dúinn féin, beag is fiú a dhéanamh den Ghaeilge nó den chultúr Éireannach, steiréitíopaí na nÉireannach a ghlacadh, muid féin a mhaslú, nó mothúcháin diúltacha eile. Uaireanta, feiceann muid é seo i ráitis a deir daoine fúthu féin go pearsanta. In amanna eile. beidh na ráitis faoi Éireannaigh ar an iomlán nó faoi ghrúpaí Éireannaigh áirithe.

Foirm amháin is féidir teacht air ná bród dolúbtha, frithghníomhach as seasmhacht in aghaidh leatroim leis na céadta in ionad bród réchúiseach as na rudaí atá speisialta fúinn mar dhaoine. Ar an mbealach seo, sainmhíníonn muid muid féin i ndáil lenár leatrom in ionad lenár ndaonnacht.

Ag brath ar an gcomhthéacs, mar thoradh ar na mothúcháin seo d’fhéadfadh Éireannaigh i dtíortha eile a sheachaint aon aird a tharraingt orthu féin agus ag triail a bheith dofheicthe, nó mar mhalairt air sin, próifíl ard a ghlacadh ach le bród dolúbtha, rómánsúil uaireanta, as a bheith ina nÉireannaigh.

Easpa Cumhachta agus Éadóchas

Daoine a cuireadh faoi chois agus a buaileadh iad arís agus arís eile, inmheánaíonn siad go bhfuil siad gan chumhacht aon rud a athrú. Maidir le hÉireannaigh aonair, luíonn síolta na heaspa cumhachta san eispéireas stairiúil a bheith coilínithe lena ndearnadh foréigean géar agus forlámhas orthu. Neartaíonn an iliomad treascairtí ón óige luath na treascairtí stairiúla seo, i gcásanna inar úsáideadh foréigean inár n-éadan go háirithe agus na clistí a chonaic muid ar aghaidheanna na ndaoine timpeall orainn. Dá thoradh sin, mothaíonn muid róbheag, rólag, róleochaileach, róscanraithe, nó ró-éagumasach chun an leatrom a cheistiú nó a dhiúltú.

Is minic go mothaíonn muid nach bhfuil aon chumhacht againn chomh maith le bheith éadóchasach faoin bhféidearthacht go n-éireoidh linn rudaí a athrú. Is féidir go léirítear é seo mar phatuaire, ionchais chaillte, cur i gcoinne aon tionscnaíocht a dhéanamh, ísle brí, iarrachtaí lucht ansmachta a shuaimhniú, nó freagairtí eile a fhágann daoine sáinnithe i lár an leatroim. Bealach áirithe amháin inar féidir é seo a fheiceáil is ea an claonadh atá ag daoine gearáin a dhéanamh faoin méid atá mícheart gan aon rud fiúntach a dhéanamh chun iarracht a dhéanamh rudaí a athrú.

Cé gur féidir go mbeadh cásanna ann inar gá foréigean a úsáid mar fhreagairt ar dhrochíde leatromach, is éifeacht ar leith é a bhaineann le heaspa cumhachta foréigean a mheas mar an t-aon bhealach amháin chun ár n-aidhmeanna a bhaint amach. Sa chiall sin, cothaíonn easpa cumhachta foréigean agus tá sé úsáideach an foréigean seo a thuiscint mar léiriú easpa cumhachta.

Deighilteachas

Ceann d’éifeachtaí den leatrom inmheánaithe is é daoine a roinnt ina ngrúpaí freasúracha nó a bheith ina chúis go bhfeiceann muid Éireannaigh eile mar an namhaid. In ionad teacht le chéile i streachailt comónta chun críoch a chur ar dheighiltí agus éagóracha agus daoine a thabhairt níos gaire le chéile, críochnaíonn muid suas milleán a chur ar a chéile nó a bheith ag troid eadrainn féin.

Is foirm shuntasach amháin de seo scoilteanna reiligiúnacha in Éirinn ach oibríonn sé ar nós leatrom eile freisin, mar shampla, aicmeachas, ciníochas, agus gnéasachas. Bhí a lán ócáidí ann ina neartaíodh an deighilteachas go gníomhach ón taobh amuigh chun a chuidiú leis an leatrom a coinneáil ach fiú mura bhfuil aon idirghabháil ghníomhach ón taobh amuigh tá claonadh ag daoine a scoilteadh mar gheall ar an leatrom inmheánaithe.

Ionsaithe ar Cheannairí

Aon duine a théann i mbun cheannasaíocht nó a éiríonn infheicthe mar cheannaire, téann siad sa bhearna bhaoil go n-ionsóidh Éireannaigh eile iad. B’fhéidir mar gheall ar an bhféinmhuinín íseal, féadann sé a bheith deacair do dhaoine muinín agus tacaíocht a thabhairt do dhuine dár ndaoine a thagann salach ar an steiréitíopa a inmheánaíodh agus a dhéanann iarracht athrú a dhéanamh.

Tá an dhinimic seo bailí in amanna ar an mbonn go bhfuil an ceannaire neamhábalta nó ag déanamh botún. Ach i gcás ina bhfeiceann muid patrún arís agus arís eile go n-ionsaítear an ceannaire nó go mbíonn siad ‘buailte amach’, tá muid ag féachaint ar phatrún leatroim inmheánaithe seachas locht aonair. Tá roinnt mhaith samplaí i stair na hÉireann den dhinimic seo.

Beag is Fiú a Dhéanamh dár Smaointeoireacht

B’fhéidir mar gheall ar an bhféinmhuinín íseal. tá claonadh ag Éireannaigh gan muinín ná luach a bheith againn inár smaointeoireacht féin nó smaointeoireacht na nÉireannach eile. Bíonn níos mó údaráis le smaointeoireacht strainséirí uaireanta ná le smaointeoireacht Éireannach.

Iompraíocht Mharthanais

Le himeacht ama, forbraíonn daoine straitéisí éagsúla beartaithe chun cuidiú le marthanas ach is gnách, ar an drochuair, go bhfágtar an leatrom slán. Áirítear leis na straitéisí sin cineálacha éagsúla andúile a bhaineann aird na ndaoine den leatrom nó a fhágann sioctha ag a éifeachtaí iad. Nó áirítear leo straitéisí lena n-iarrtar seans a laghdú go ndíríonn an leatrom orthu amhail iompraíocht shuaimhnithe nó asamhlaithe. Agus áirítear leo bealaí a aimsiú a bheith i gclaonpháirt leis an gcóras leatromach nó é a láimhsiú chun mharthanas nó rathúnas na ndaoine aonair a áirithiú nó b’fhéidir mharthanas nó rathúnas a ngarghaolta, agus daoine eile a fhágáil le fulaingt.

Foirm amháin d’iompraíocht mharthanais is ea faoiseamh ón leatrom a lorg trí leatrom a dhéanamh ar ghrúpaí eile, mar shampla, inimircigh nó Taistealaithe. Chonaic muid níos luaithe an chaoi ar imríonn Éireannaigh ról i gcoilíniú daoine eile agus d’fhág iompraíocht mharthanais leochaileach iad chun ról ciníochais a ghlacadh agus iad ag dul ar imirce go tíortha eile amhail na Stáit Aontaithe. Cosúil le foirmeacha uile d’iompraíocht mharthanais, ar ndóigh, d’fhág sé seo an leatrom níos leithne slán.

Tá sé soiléir go bhfuil sé i gceist le saoirse Éireannach na foirmeacha a thógann leatrom inmheánaithe laistigh d’aoisghrúpaí éagsúla agus grúpaí sóisialta eile a shainaithint, agus aon mhothúcháin a bhaineann leo a scaoileadh amach. Ciallaíonn sé freisin a bheith bródúil agus cinneadh a dhéanamh bréag a chur ar aon mhothúcháin neamhthábhachta, ísleachta nó deighilteachais agus a bheith ag gníomh lasmuigh díobh. Tá sé i gceist chomh maith aghaidh a thabhairt ar pháirteanna a ghlac muid mar tíoránaigh i ndáil le mná, Taistealaithe, duine de dhath agus grúpaí eitneacha mionlaigh, oibrithe, LADTA+, nó grúpaí eile faoi leatrom.

Caitlicigh Rómhánacha

D’eascair an dlúthionannú idir an reiligiún Caitliceach Rómhánach agus Éireannachas ar chúiseanna stairiúla an-sonrach. Tháinig cáil ar an gCríostaíocht Éireannach luath, ón 6ú haois ar aghaidh, as a paisean, a aiséiteachas, a dúil sa nádúr, a foghlaim, agus a leabhair. Níor athraigh creacha na Lochlannach sna 8ú - 10ú haoiseanna Críostaíocht na ndaoine dúchasacha agus bhí an Chríostaíocht Éireannach slán den chuid is mó le linn aoiseanna luatha an choilínithe Angla-Normannaigh.

Athraíodh é seo leis an Reifirméisean Protastúnach, ag tosú sa 16ú haois, nuair gur Protastúnaigh iad na coilínithe den chuid is mó as sin amach. Chuir braistint bharrchéimíocht na bProtastúnach agus eagla roimh an gCaitliceachas gné reiligiúnach leis an leatrom: thug sé ‘cúis’ eile le hainghníomhartha amhail na sléachtanna a rinne Arm Piúratánach Sasanach Cromail in 1649-52.

Mar chuid de chur faoi chois an chultúir agus an chórais shóisialta Ghaelaigh ársa, achtaíodh dlíthe (amhail na Péindlíthe) ag pointí éagsúla a chuir cosc go sonrach ar an reiligiún agus a d’fhág Caitliceacaigh Rómhánacha amach as comhchearta sibhialta. Tugadh leis na dlíthe seo agus le ráitis ó pholaiteoirí Sasanacha agus sna meáin Sasanacha níos déanaí le fios nach raibh na Caitliceacaigh Éireannacha chomh sibhialta, chomh cliste ná chomh daonna le daoine eile agus ar an mbealach sin tugadh ‘údar’ leis an bhforéigean brúidiúil agus leis an iarracht ar thiarnas.

B’éifeacht amháin de leatrom na gCaitliceach í stádas cumhachtach a thabhairt d’institiúidí Caitliceach Rómhánach i measc na ndaoine. Bhí foirm luacha marthanais ar thacaíocht láidir agus comhlíonadh docht don Eaglais i gcomhthéacs leatrom na nÉireannach. Neartaigh é seo an claonadh gurb iad an dá mar a chéile iad a bheith i d’Éireannach agus a bheidh i do Chaitliceach agus coimhthíos iarmhartach daoine a bhfuil ceangal le reiligiún eile agus iad nach bhfuil ceangal reiligiúnach acu.

Tá mothúcháin inmheánaithe de chiontacht agus neamhthábhacht ar a lán Caitliceacaigh. I gcás daoine eile, tá an-fhearg orthu leis an eaglais institiúideach. Ar thaobh amháin, tagann glacadh agus umhlaíocht gan cheistiú as, agus ar an taobh eile ar fad, diúltú do gach cuid dár n-oidhreacht Chaitliceach. Cuireadh taithí níos déanaí ar mhí‑úsáid ghnéasach leanaí agus níos mó airde ar ghnéasachas agus forlámhas na bhfear i measc na cléire agus na reiligiúnach, leis an bhfearg roimh, agus diúltú na heaglaise institiúidí.

Tá roinnt fréamhacha sna scannal drochíde i gcleachtais mhí-eolacha agus srianta maidir le teagmháil dhaonna, dlúithe agus gnéas. Bhí leanaí á n-ionsaí, in institiúidí a bhí faoi stiúir na heaglaise go háirithe, áiteanna inar nglac a dtuismitheoirí leis go mbeidís sábháilte. Toisc í a bheith ina heaglais phatrarcach, ar ndóigh, bhí an-tionchar ag gnéasachas agus forlámhas na bhfear ar a cur chuige. Is príomhstreachailt í fós a imríonn tionchar ar Chaitlicigh uile dul i ngleic le gnéasachas, forlámhas na bhfear, homafóibe agus frith-Sheimíteachas.

Cé is moite den mhothúchán pianmhar agus taithí ar iompraíocht leatromach, chuir an reiligiún Caitliceach meabhrú ar fáil dúinn dár maitheas mar a cruthaíodh i ndeilbh Dé muid. Thug sé braistint cheangail dúinn le daoine ar fud an domhain freisin agus aird mhaith dá bhfolláine. Moladh dúinn gurb é an rud is fearr is féidir linn a dhéanamh, ar bhealach dearfach, ár saol a dhíriú ar riachtanais daoine eile. Ach cuid thábhachtach eile den obair atá le déanamh againn is ea an ciníochas a rinneamar mar mhisinéirí Éireannacha i gcultúir dhúchais agus thromlaigh dhomhanda a admháil agus a scaoileadh amach.

Ós rud é gur thit líon na gcainteoirí Gaeilge dúchais, ba bhealach simplí, más míchruinn, é daoine dúchais na hÉireann a aithint ach iad a bheith ina gCaitliceach. Chuir sé seo cuma coimhlinte reiligiúnaí ar an gcoilíniú leanúnach, ar an bhfreasúra agus, go háirithe, ar na scoilteanna i bpobal na hÉireann a bhí ann mar gheall air. An ‘smaoineamh’ go raibh na coimhlintí agus na scoilteanna mar chuid de streachailt reiligiúnach a bhfuair an chuid eile den Eoraip réidh leis fadó, bhí sé ina ‘chúis’ beag is fiú a dhéanamh de na deacrachtaí in Éirinn mar fhadhbanna intreacha na nÉireannach in ionad mar oidhreacht an leatroim. Bhí sé ina ‘chúis’ chomh maith a bheith drochmheasúil faoi mhuintir na hÉireann beag beann ar a gcúlra, ach faoi Chaitlicigh Éireannacha go háirithe, nuair a chuaigh siad ar imirce go tíortha ina labhraíodh Béarla den chuid is mó, tíortha Protastúnacha an formhór mór acu.

Daoine Protastúnaigh

Ba é an Protastúnachas, sa chiall leathan, reiligiún na gcoilínithe in Éirinn é. Tugadh Protastúnaigh go hÉirinn chun teacht in áit na nÉireannach dúchais le linn na ‘bPlandálacha’ éagsúla a tharla ón 17ú aois ar aghaidh. Chruthaigh Plandáil Uladh, go háirithe, coimhlint fhadtéarmach idir an pobal dúchais a gcoigistíodh a dtalamh agus na coilínithe a bhí ag teacht isteach a mheas go bhfuair siad an talamh go dleathach, go díreach nó go hindíreach, ón gCoróin Shasanach agus bhí siad meáite orthu a choinneáil ar cibé bealach a mheas siad gur gá.

D’fhulaing Preispitéirigh, agus Protastúnaigh Easaontacha eile, roinnt leithcheala reiligiúnaigh ón mbunaíocht Anglacánaí Protastúnaí in Éirinn. Bhí orthu cánacha a íoc (‘deachúna’) chun tacú le hEaglais Anglacánach na hÉireann. Cuireadh cosc ar Phrotastúnaigh easaontacha ar oifigí poiblí uile go dtí Acht Faoiseamh d’Easaontóirí Protastúnacha 1780 agus níor tugadh aitheantas dá bpóstaí mar dhleathach go dtí 1842. Anuas air sin, ó bhlianta luaithe na Plandála, bhí siad faoi bhagairt ó na hÉireannaigh dhúchais agus cuireadh srianta lena bhforbairt eacnamaíoch chun leasanna eacnamaíocha i Sasana a chosaint. Dá thoradh sin, chuaigh roinnt mhaith acu go Meiriceá Thuaidh mar chuid den choilíniú Sasanach-Albanach ansin.

I ndeireadh na 1700idí, bhí ról ceannasach ag Protastúnaigh Uladh chun gluaiseacht réabhlóideach a bhunú, na hÉireannaigh Aontaithe, a bhí ag súil comhghuaillíochtaí le Caitlicigh dhúchais a chruthú chun riail na Sasanach in Éirinn a threascairt agus sochaí a chruthú le comhchearta do gach fear Éireannach (ach ní raibh mná Éireannacha san áireamh fós), beag beann ar aicme ná ar reiligiún.

Cloíodh éirí amach 1798 ina dhiaidh sin agus cuireadh faoi chois go crua é. Rinne na Sasanaigh bearta ansin chun aontacht idir na Protastúnaigh agus na coilínithe a mhéadú agus cosc a chur ar chomhghuaillíochtaí le Caitlicigh dhúchais sa todhchaí. Áiríodh orthu sin tabhairt isteach Éireann i ‘Ríocht Aontaithe na Breataine Móire agus Éireann’ in 1800, tacaíocht d’eagraíochtaí amhail an tOrd Oráisteach a raibh d’aidhm aige ardchéimíocht na bProtastúnach agus aontacht thar scoilteanna aicme agus eile a chur chun cinn, agus féiniúlacht Shasanach in ionad féiniúlacht Éireannach a chothú. Bhí na bearta seo rathúil den chuid is mó sa mhéid go raibh tairseach chriticiúil Phrotastúnachais Uladh ag féachaint le suíomh a bhí níos láidre acu agus leis na naisc pholaitiúla leis an mBreatain a chosaint.

Tá braistint ag an gcuid dúinn gur Protastúnaigh Uladh muid go bhfuil muid faoi bhagairt go buan – ní hamháin ó Éireannaigh dhúchais, ach ó fhealladh na Breataine. Tháinig righnis as i gcultúr na bProtastúnach Uladh, rud atá in ann comhghéilleadh beag a mheascadh suas le riosca dár saol féin. Tagann fógairtí an-fheiceálach agus léirithe Briotanachais agus Protastúnachais as chomh maith a chúblálann fórsaí ‘coimeádacha’ i Sasana agus a bhaineann suaitheadh as fórsaí ‘forásacha’. Ina dhiaidh sin is é an toradh a bhíonn air seo leagan leatroim frith-Éireannaigh sainiúil, fonóid faoi Phrotastúnachas Uladh atá forleathan i bpríomhshruth na sochaí agus na meán Sasanach, gan aon fhreagairt a ghlacadh i ndáiríre as an bhfáth a d’éirigh na righnis seo.

Shíolraigh na Protastúnaigh a bhí in áiteanna eile in Éirinn (‘Protastúnaigh an Deiscirt’ nó Angla-Éireannaigh) ón mbunaíocht Shasanach Phrotastúnach riaracháin, bhreithiúnach, mhíleata agus thráchtála in Éirinn. Ba dhaoine iad a shocraigh isteach i staideanna rachmais, mar úinéirí talún nó i dtráchtáil, i mBaile Átha Cliath agus timpeall air ach scaipthe ar fud na tíre freisin. Tar éis shaoirse na hÉireann, d’aithin Protastúnaigh sa ‘deisceart’ go raibh muid i stát ina raibh an lámh in uachtar ag Caitlicigh Rómhánacha. Cuid a bhí inmheánaithe sa chás seo ba ea gan aird a tharraingt orainn féin agus gan éilimh a dhéanamh.

Tá roinnt eilimintí i leatrom inmheánaithe Protastúnach: ag mothú go bhfuil muid níos fearr ná Caitlicigh; faitíos roimh Chaitlicigh; indibhidiúlachas; mímhuinín as éinne, fiú Protastúnaigh eile; ag mothú nach mbíonn fáilte romhainn; ag mothú nach fíor-Éireannaigh muid; gan a bheith cinnte go bhfuil an ceart againn a bheith anseo; eagla go gcaillfidh muid ár dteach, ár dtalamh nó go bhfaighidh muid bás; faitíos go séanfar nó go scoithfear amach muid, lena bhfágtar ciúin muid; cosantacht dholúbtha; féiníomhá bunaithe ar a dhéine is a oibríonn muid agus a rathúla is atá muid; dáiríreacht agus easpa spontáineachta; dualgas agus dílseacht; a bheith dea-mhúinte; béim ar chuma; deacrachtaí i gcreideamh ár maitheasa; ag mothú amaideach agus náirithe faoi ‘Phrotastúnaigh tiubha’; séanadh go bhfuil fadhb ann nó gur cogadh é na Trioblóidí; diúltú dul i ngleic le leatrom na gCaitliceach; claonpháirteachas; ciontacht; ag mothú go n-imrítear leatrom orainn, agus; ag léiriú patrúin mhairtírigh nó cheartaiseacha.

Ba mar gheall ar thaithí níos luaithe de chrá agus de leatrom na gcoilínithe féin a chuir siad ról an tíoránaigh orthu féin in Éirinn. Cuid thábhachtach na hoibre anois is ea an ról stairiúil an tíoránaigh sin a scaoileadh amach. Tá dhá ghné ag baint leis, an ról sin a admháil agus é a scaoileadh amach. Mar gheall ar a startha difriúla, d’fhéadfaí cuma dhifriúil a beith air do Phrotastúnaigh Uladh agus Protastúnaigh ó ‘dheisceart’ na hÉireann. Is dócha go n-áireofaí leis: féiniúlacht Éireannach a ghlacadh go hiomlán; an fíoras gur cuid lárnach fhadtéarmach shochaí na hÉireann muid a aithint; na láidreachtaí a thug muid do shochaí na hÉireann a shainaithint; na bealaí a gcuirtear faoi chois muid, mar choilínithe Protastúnacha inar gcónaí in Éirinn, ag patrúin ansmachta Shasanacha a shainaithint; agus, oidhreacht ár róil maidir le leatrom ar Éireannaigh eile a ghlacadh. Áireofar leis chomh maith bród a bheith againn conas, ar leithligh ó ról stairiúil an tíoránaigh, atá traidisiún ann freisin gur sheas Protastúnaigh na hÉireann an fód ar son dóibh siúd a rinneadh cos ar bolg orthu.

Oidhreachtaí Eile Reiligiúnacha

Tá oidhreachtaí eile reiligiúnacha ag roinnt mhaith Éireannaigh, ar oileán na hÉireann agus ag Éireannaigh an diaspóra (Giúdach, Moslamach, Hiondúch, Bahá’íoch agus cinn eile), trí idirphósadh go minic. Ní dhearna muid iarracht conas a dhéanann leatrom na nÉireannach difear do ghrúpaí éagsúla reiligiúnacha a leagan amach, ná conas a idirghníomhaíonn sé le leatrom inmheánaithe bunaithe ar na féiniúlachtaí eile sin. Is cuid amháin eile na hoibre atá fós le déanamh é sin.

An Ghaeilge

Ba í an Ghaeilge, mar theanga labhartha na ndaoine, teanga an tromlaigh suas le 1800 ach d’éirigh sí ina teanga mhionlaigh le linn an 19ú haois. Leis an gcóras bunoideachais a tugadh isteach ag an am toirmisceadh labhairt na Gaeilge agus cuireadh pionós ar pháistí as an teanga a labhairt ar scoil. Bhí tionchar díréireach ag an nGorta Mór i lár na haoise sin ar chainteoirí Gaeilge trí bhás agus eisimirce. Le linn na haoise seo freisin, galldaíodh logainmneacha Gaeilge go córasach agus cuireadh logainmneacha Béarla in ionad logainmneacha Gaeilge agus ar an gcaoi sin cuidiú leis an nasc a bhriseadh idir daoine agus an talamh ar ar chónaigh siad.

Bhí páirt láidir ag leatrom inmheánaithe i meath na teanga. Chonacthas do cheannairí polaitiúla agus eaglasta mór le rá, mar shampla, go raibh an teanga cúlánta nó gur fhág sí daoine óga faoi mhíbhuntáiste go heacnamaíoch, iad siúd a bhí ag súil le heisimirceach chuig Sasana nó na Stáit Aontaithe a dhéanamh go háirithe, agus mhol siad an Béarla a chur ina hionad. Lean na dearcthaí seo ar aghaidh agus, fiú i measc roinnt cainteoirí dúchasacha, tá amhras ar dhaoine faoi luach na teanga nó faoin tábhacht go ndeimhnítear go bhfanann sí lárnach sa chultúr.

Thosaigh iarrachtaí an teanga a athbheochan i gcuid níos déanaí na 19ú haoise. I measc daoine eile, bhí ról tábhachtach ag Protastúnaigh (agus tá fós) in iarrachtaí meath na teanga a chur ina cheart arís. Áirítear leo Dubhghlas de hÍde a bhunaigh Conradh na Gaeilge in 1893. Bhí cuid d'Athbheochan na Gaeilge níos leithne ina dhiaidh sin é seo as a dtáinig spéis athnuaite i dteanga agus cultúr na ndaoine agus chruthaigh sé comhthéacs don Éirí Amach 1916 agus Cogadh na Saoirse 1919-21.

Tar éis críochdheighilte, spreagadh athbheochan na Gaeilge agus tacaíodh léi sa Saorstát/Phoblacht. Mar gheall ar a phríomhpholasaí, áfach, maidir le foghlaim éigeantach na Gaeilge sna scoileanna in éineacht le mothúcháin de náire agus ísleacht ceangailte leis an teanga de thoradh leatrom inmheánaithe, thóg roinnt mhaith daoine seasamh naimhdeach léi. Faoi bhrúnna ó cheannas an Bhéarla, tá líon na gcainteoirí dúchasacha Gaeilge ag laghdú fós.

I dTuaisceart Éireann, níor thug an rialtas ina raibh ceannas ag na hAontachtaithe aon tacaíocht don teanga agus breathnaíodh í mar a bhí sí níos ísle agus neamhriachtanach. Chonaic siad í mar uirlis in aghaidh Críochdheighilte agus dhiúltaigh siad bearta comhaontaithe a chur chun feidhme chun tacú léi. Tarlaíonn tagairtí maslacha agus magúla don teanga i gcainteanna polaitiúla fós. Mar aon leis seo, i rith ‘na dTrioblóidí’ agus ó bhí siad ann, bhí athbheochan spéise sa Ghaeilge, ceol agus spóirt Ghaelacha i limistéir náisiúnacha Thuaisceart Éireann, agus spéis phobalbhunaithe i líon beag limistéir Aontachtacha freisin.

Is bréagnú tábhachtach anseo é cinneadh a dhéanamh an teanga a aiséileamh agus na mothúcháin uile a chuireann constaicí i mbealach a ceiliúrtha agus a húsáid go líofa a scaoileadh amach.

Le blianta beaga anuas bhí iarrachtaí ann an Ultais a aithint agus tacú léi in Éirinn. Dhíorthaigh sí seo as Albainis na hÍsealchríocha, teanga na bPreispitéireach Albanach a tháinig leis an bPlandáil Uladh. Gealladh leis an gComhaontú Aoine an Chéasta/Bhéal Feirste idir Rialtas na Ríochta Aontaithe agus Rialtas na hÉireann tacaíocht d’Ultais mar ‘chuid de shaibhreas cultúrtha oileán na hÉireann’.

Mar gheall ar an líon beag daoine ag a bhfuil Ultais líofa, agus b’fhéidir a stair mar theanga na gcoilínithe, d’fhéadfadh sé a bheith deacair d’Éireannaigh eile an Ultais a urramú. Ach anois is cuid de stair na hÉireann í agus cosúil le gach teanga atá faoi bhagairt tá aitheantas, tacaíocht agus marthanas tuillte aici.

Gnéasachas agus Forlámhas na bhFear

Mar is amhlaidh le tíortha eile, is sochaí í Éire ina bhfuil ceannas ag tosaíochtaí agus dearcthaí fireanna. Bhí tionchar domhain ag cumasc na hEaglaise agus an Stáit ar mhná i réimsí polaitiúla agus reiligiúnacha araon ár saolta agus gan mórán deiseanna ann éalú as an bhforlámhas struchtúrach cumaiscthe. Tá muid tearcionadaithe go mór in áiteanna cumhachta agus tionchair agus déantar leatrom orainn i roinnt mhaith foirmeacha gach lá.

Is é an t-ualach aonair is mó inár saol mar mhná polasaithe agus cleachtas gnéasaíoch. Chonaic muid fír ag dul chun tairbhe i gcásanna ina raibh muid thíos leis. Chonaic agus chuala muid an fháilte roimh mhac, agus i mbéaloideas na hÉireann, chuala muid an trua nuair a tháinig iníon eile fós. Chonaic muid gur fágadh an talamh ag mic ár dteaghlach. Chonaic muid freisin an saoirse a bhí ag buachaillí níos lú obair an tí a dhéanamh.

Thug muid ceiliúradh teaghlach mór faoi deara, b’fhéidir le bliain amháin ar éigean idir páistí. Ní hiondúil go mbíodh mórán machnaimh ar mháithreacha na bpáistí sin. I dTuaisceart Éireann bhí roinnt Caitlicigh i bhfabhar teaghlaigh mhóra mar straitéis chun níos mó Caitlicigh ná Protastúnaigh a shíolrú, an tromlach leatromach sa chuid sin d’Éirinn.

Leis an míshástacht aon ghníomhaíocht ghnéasach a dhéanamh, seachas laistigh de phósadh, spreagadh go leor againn a bheith rúnmhar faoinár saolta dlúthphearsanta agus rinne roinnt mhaith againn cinneadh a phósadh go luaith chun an dúil dlúthchaidrimh a shásamh. Bhíothas ag súil go gcaithfeadh muid a bheith ar fáil go gnéasach dár bhfear chéile am ar bith toisc dhá mbeadh sé ‘ag bradaíl’ bheadh an locht orainn. A bheith ansin le haghaidh úsáid na bhfear sa chiall ghnéasach, is é ceann de na caillteanais is mó do mhná Éireannacha. Rinneadh cur síos ar ár gcoirp mar ‘ócáidí peaca’.

Nuair a tháinig an fhuil mhíosta orainn bhí sé beagnach náireach rúnmhar agus ba chomhartha cinnte é pillíní sláintíocha a thabhairt faoin gcuntar siopa go raibh an ghníomhaíocht seo le cur i bhfolach agus cúis náire é. Níor moladh dúinn riamh gur bronntanas cineálta é an ghnéasacht, go raibh muid i gceannas ar ár gcoirp féin agus gur féidir linn cinneadh a dhéanamh cad atá muid ag iarraidh.

Bhí an t-aistriú ó easpa teagmhála gnéis go neart páistí a shíolrú trámach do roinnt mhaith ban. Bhí sé uafásach do roinnt ban an cleachtas cnámh an pheilbhis a bhriseadh (simfiseatóime) nuair a bhí leanbh á shaolú. Níor tháinig an cleachtas brúidiúil neamhriachtanach seo ar eolas go forleathan go dtí gur tháinig sé amach mar fhadhb shláinte i mná níos sine le blianta beaga anuas.

Fiú maidir le rogha ghairme, treoraíodh muid chuig raon teoranta post inár bpobail mar mhúinteoirí, banaltraí nó státseirbhísigh ísealghráid. Agus, le roinnt mhaith blianta, i gcuid mhór na bpost sin, bhí ar mhná éirigh as agus iad pósta, lena cruthaíodh poist d’fhir a measadh gur níos luachmhara iad toisc gur saothraithe iad.

I gcomhthéacs coilíneach, éiríonn mí-úsáid na bhfear ar mhná agus páistí níos feiceálaí mar bhealaigh chun bréag-chumhacht a fháil ar na daoine siúd atá faoina lámh agus a bhfuil cead ag an tsochaí a bheith i gceannas orthu. Agus d’fhéadfadh mná/máithreacha, chun “a bhfir” a chosaint ar na coilínithe, titim dá dtost. Mar mhná, d’fhéadfadh muid géilleadh do ‘mhí-úsáid a ghlacadh’ nó ‘teacht i gceannas’ mar fhreagairt ar an tuiscint nach bhfuil ‘cumas’ ag ‘ár bhfir’ muid a chosaint, nó a bheith ‘i gceannas’. Arís is róil inmheánacha dolúbtha iad uile ach is iad na róil a brúdh orainn.

D’fhéadfadh muid, mar mhná, patrún ‘i gceannas’ a thógáil orainn féin, ach tar éis an gnéasachas an ceann is fearr a fháil orainn, ní thagann sé as tuiscint ar chumhacht dúchasach an duine. Rinne gach duine chomh maith agus b’fhéidir leo, ach scoilte amach is amach. Fágadh muid inár n-iarracht teacht slán as taifeadtaí na mí-úsáide luaithe agus as díobháil a treisíodh go sóisialta agus a bhí institiúidithe.

Mná Caitliceacha Éireannacha

Saolaíodh mná Caitliceacha in Éirinn i dteaghlaigh agus i bpobail ar a raibh tionchar mór ag an Eaglais Chaitliceach Rómhánach. Thug searmanais agus deasghnátha, amhail Baistí, an Chéad Chomaoineach, agus araile, struchtúr dár saolta. Bhí tionchar láidir Caitliceach ar an óige, scoil, blianta na ndéaga, fostaíocht, buachaillí, cailíní, pósadh, máithreachas, rannpháirtíocht sa pholaitíocht, spórt agus an pobal.

Chomh déanach leis na 1960idí bhí ar bhean dul go dtí an eaglais chun a bheith beannaithe, chun í a dhéanamh slán arís, tar éis an ‘truailliú’ leanbh a shíolrú. Agus má fuair leanbh bás sular baisteadh í/é, daoradh chun adhlactha í/é taobh amuigh talamh coisricthe, amach ó bhéal an phobail.

D’éirigh mná dofheicthe gan aon áit ‘chun tosaigh’ i seirbhísí na Eaglaise Caitlicí. Aon bhean thuata a labhair amach faoi leatrom na mban san Eaglais nó a raibh tuairim aici thar theagasc na hEaglaise a raibh sí cróga a dóthain í a chur in iúl do na meáin, chuaigh sí i mbaol a bheith cáinte go trom nó scoite.

Tá athruithe ag tarlú do mhná Chaitliceacha in Éirinn mar gheall ar thionchar ghluaiseacht idirnáisiúnta na mban, feasacht ar chearta sibhialta go hidirnáisiúnta, agus tógáil teagmhálaithe lasmuigh den oileán, leis an Aontas Eorpach go háirithe. Tháinig frithghiniúint, colscaradh, ginmhilleadh, agus comhionannas pósta ar leabhair na reachtaíochta sa ghlúin dheireanach. Nochtadh scannail mhí-úsáid ghnéis na hEaglaise agus tugadh leatrom na mban óg in institiúidí a bhí faoi stiúir na heaglaise chun solais. Ina theannta sin, ba cheannródaithe iad roinnt mhaith de na mná reiligiúnacha a bhí i gceannas ar ár scoileanna, ag a raibh dearcadh thar an bhfreagracht páistí a thógáil. Spreag siad cailíní chun a bheith rathúil i ngairmeacha agus sholáthair siad deiseanna dóibh thar na róil a bhítí ag súil a bhí ag a máithreacha agus a seanmháithreacha.

Tá muid in ann a bheith istigh linn féin i gcomhluadar ban Caitliceach Éireannach eile. Braitheann muid cineáltas agus gean ar a chéile. Tógann muid cairdis fhadtéarmacha lena chéile toisc go bhfuil tuiscint againn ar shaincheisteanna a chéile a bhfuil domhain agus as a thagann croíúlacht inláimhsithe. Tá muid cliste agus labhraíonn muid ónár gcroí, réidh le troid ar son cúiseanna ina gcreideann muid. Tógadh muid le feasacht agus le coinsias faoi shaolta ár gcomharsan. Tá muid fáilteach roimh dhaoine agus tá comhbhá againn le mionlaigh nó leo siúd a d’fhéadfadh a bheith fágtha ar leataobh. Tairbhíonn an pobal i gcoitinne de mhisneach agus d’ionracas ban Caitliceach Éireannach. In ainneoin gnéasachais agus fhorlámhas na bhfear, níor mhair muid amháin, ach tháinig muid faoi bhláth.

Mná Protastúnacha Éireannacha

Tógadh mná Protastúnacha i dteaghlaigh Phrotastúnacha éagsúla – Eaglais na hÉireann, Preispitéireach, Meitidisteach, srl. Bhíodh déine ann go minic i gcás inarbh é an fear ceann an teaghlaigh go traidisiúnta. Dhéanadh sé na príomhchinntí uile, gan idirphlé nó machnamh ar bhaill teaghlaigh eile go hiondúil. D’fhéadfadh sé a bheith ina chúis le doicheall agus rúndacht. Is cuimhin le go leor againn anois, mná níos sine, agus muid ag fás aníos agus ár máithreacha a bhreathnú agus iad i róil umhla agus ghéilliúla, ag géilleadh do mhianta agus cinntí a bhfear chéile. D’fhág an fás aníos mar chailín i dteaghlach docht Protastúnach tús áite a thabhairt ar dhaoine eile, na fír agus na buachaillí go háirithe.

Cáineadh muid a ghabh chugainn ról níos láidre agus níos ceannasaí agus, má tháinig sé sin as mná eile, léirigh sé a ngnéasachas inmheánaithe.

Ní bhíodh an Domhnach ina lá taitnimh ná spraoi (i dteaghlaigh Phreispitéireacha go háirithe). Ba é clár oibre an lae scoil Domhnaigh agus an eaglais uair nó dhó. Chuirtí an teilifís agus cluichí i leataobh, ní bhíodh glacadh le cniotáil fiú! Bhíodh siopaí, pictiúrlanna agus tithe tábhairne dúnta.

Go dtí 1965 bhíodh clóis shúgartha dúnta ar an Domhnach i gcodanna Thuaisceart Éireann agus chrochtaí na luascáin ionas nach féidir iad a úsáid. Athraíodh an saol ábhairín ó shin le gluaiseacht i dtreo comhionannais agus i bhfad níos mó daoine ag tiontú i dtreo sochaí níos saolta. Tá scoileanna níos imeasctha le blianta beaga anuas freisin agus urramaítear cúlraí reiligiúnacha éagsúla iontu.

Bhíodh imní ar mhná cuma mhaith a choinneáil ar rudaí agus faoi céard a smaoineodh daoine eile amhail a gcomharsa. Ba é sin ina chúis do roinnt mhaith againn a bheith ró-bhródúil faoina dtithe - glantachán agus slacht a chur ar an teach go hiomarcach. Bhíodh an rúndacht i réim freisin. Bhíodh frásaí amhail ‘Gan do náire a ligean leis na comharsana’ agus ‘Cibé rud a deir tú, abair faic’ coitianta.

In ainneoin gnéasachais, tá muid mná Protastúnacha Éireannacha go maith, seiftiúil, lách agus tugann muid an-tacaíocht dá chéile. Is féidir é sin a fheiceáil go soiléir inár dteaghlaigh agus deirfiúracha, máithreacha agus seanmháithreacha á gcuidiú agus á dtacú lena chéile. Le linn 30 bliain chogaíochta nó ‘na Trioblóidí’ i dTuaisceart Éireann, ba iad mná go príomha a chruthaigh grúpaí pobail agus a thug tacaíocht dá chéile agus dá dteaghlaigh, pobail á gcoimeád le chéile. D’fhéadfaí é sin a fheiceáil fós i ngrúpaí áitiúla gníomhacha na mban i limistéir den lucht oibre.

Fir Éireannacha

Fuair muidne ó ghlúnta níos sine an teachtaireacht agus muid ag fás aníos gurbh é an rud ab fhearr a d’fhéad muid a dhéanamh ná bás a fháil ar son Éireann i gcúis an tsaoirse. Dúradh linn nach mbuafadh muid, ach b’fhéidir gheobhadh muid bás go gaisciúil, agus scríobhfaí amhráin fúinn agus d’inseofaí scéalta faoina ndearna muid.

Le haghaidh cuid mhór dúinn, bhí cuma ar stair na hÉireann gur stair threascartha í. D’fheall brathadóirí nó spiairí ar na ceannaircí teipthe éagsúla nó cloíodh iad trí fhórsa ollmhór. Agus ní raibh stair shuntasach ann gur tháinig lucht tacaíochta chun na hÉireannaigh a chosaint. Ag tréimhsí éagsúla, seoladh airm Fhrancacha nó Spáinneacha le cuidiú, ach cloíodh iad nó bhí siad róbheag chun aon tionchar mór a bheith acu. Ní raibh tacaíocht eachtrach chomhsheasmhach ann. Mar sin, is annamh go bhfuil muid ag súil le tacaíocht a fháil nó go mbeadh comhghuaillithe againn.

I bhfianaise nach féidir linn a bhuachan roimh, d’aimsigh roinnt againn bealaigh chun an córas a láimhsiú agus chun cur in aghaidh údaráis le buanna beaga ar leibhéal aonair nó pobail dár ngnóthachan pearsanta féin. Tháinig patrún as gan a bheith díreach agus gan a iompar le hionracas. Uaireanta, tugadh i dtír ar Éireannaigh eile mar thoradh air sin, a léiríodh i dtagairtí don ‘fhear gaimbín’ nó don ‘chneámhaire’.

Inár streachailt gan a mhothú go holc fúinn féin, téann cuid againn i dtuilleamaí an alcóil, an chearrbhachais nó andúile eile. D’éirigh an cumas a lán alcóil a ól, go háirithe, ina údar bróid d’ainneoin an damáiste a rinne sé.

Léiríodh cruas ár saolta mar fhir le brat foréigin a bhí suite díreach faoin dromchla agus a tháinig amach, mar shampla, nuair a d’ól muid alcól. Ar scoil, rinneadh ardleibhéil foréigin orainn laistigh den seomra ranga. Bhuailtí le slat nó le strapaí leathair nó doirne muid go tráthrialta. Bhíodh an scoil ina foinse scéine agus náire go minic. Bhí foréigean sa bhaile freisin. Measadh gur drochthuismitheoirí iad tuismitheoirí nár bhuail a gcuid páistí chun iallach a chur orthu iompar mar ba cheart. Mar bhuachaillí, spreagadh muid cluichí cogaidh a imirt, imirt le gunnaí, agus cineálacha eile rólimeartha foréigní.

Toisc nach raibh a lán deiseanna chun scaoileadh amach, d’fhoghlaim muid gan labhairt faoinár mothúcháin nó ár dtaithí, gach rud a choimeád istigh. Bháigh muid ár mothúcháin i ndeochanna nó léirigh muid iad le foréigean in aghaidh ban agus páistí, nó fear eile. Bhí an cruas a bhí romhainn, an t-uaigneas, agus an brú faoi chois dár mothúcháin mar bhonn taca faoi leatrom na mban agus choinnigh siad ina áit é, go háirithe.

Bhíothas ag súil go mbeadh gá dúinn dul ar imirce chun obair a aimsiú. Níor fhill roinnt fear riamh. Chríochnaigh cuid acu suas ina n‑aonar agus scoite ar shráideanna Londan agus cathracha móra eile thar lear. D’oibrigh siad saolta crua ar láithreáin tógála nó tolláin le méid beag a bheith ag súil leis. Chaill roinnt mhaith acu teagmháil lena dteaghlaigh agus iad ag dul in aois agus, arís, ba é alcól ceann de na píosaí sóláis a bhí á dtairiscint.

San am a chuaigh thart, tharraing reiligiún agus an tsagartacht líon mór fear. Rinne roinnt mhaith acu obair dheonach chun freastal ar dhaoine faoi chois i dtíortha éagsúla. Ach is minic go mbíodh sé seo i gcomhthéacs reiligiúin agus eaglaise an-dian agus dealbh. Agus cé go ndearnadh roinnt mhaith acu obair mhaith, maidir le cuid dóibh, d’imir siad a dtionchar go docht agus go leatromach. Ba iad uaigneas agus scoiteacht cuid den streachailt a bhí roimh go leor fear agus, maidir le cuid acu, léirigh sé seo i mí-úsáid alcóil nó mí-úsáid ban agus páistí.

Le haghaidh na nglúnta níos óige, athraíodh a lán. Tá pionós corpartha mídhleathach anois. Bhí rath ag na hÉireannaigh i gcúrsaí spóirt idirnáisiúnta, siamsaíochta, polaitíochta, an tsaoil acadúil, agus athraithe shóisialta. Shocraigh roinnt mhaith Éireannach caighdeáin arda agus bhí siad inspioráideach do dhaoine i dtíortha eile. Mar sin, ní ghlacann muid na leibhéil náire ná féinamhrais agus a ghlac glúnta níos sine.

An teachtaireacht maidir le bás a fháil ar son na hÉireann, cuireadh ceann níos dearfaí ina hionad maidir le difríocht a dhéanamh sa domhan. Le haghaidh roinnt againn, cuireadh teachtaireacht in ionad an tseanchinn lena spreagtar muid a bheith rathúil i gcúrsaí gnó, spóirt, siamsaíochta, nó na healaíona, airgead a dhéanamh, nó cáil a bhaint amach. Spreagtar muid leis seo, ar ndóigh, neamhionannais na sochaí aicme-bhunaithe a ghlacadh. Tugadh le leitheadúlacht na meáin shóisialta foinsí nua tionchair agus struis isteach inár saolta mar fhir níos óige agus bíonn teagmháil le pornagrafaíocht forleathan.

In ainneoin leatrom inmheánaithe na bhfear seo, d’éirigh linn mar fhir Éireannacha greim a choinneáil ar neart cáilíochtaí spéisiúla. Tá croíúlacht ann, agus cineáltas, boige, toilteanas le cuidiú, a bheith ar fáil do dhaoine, acmhainn grinn, a bheith in ann canadh agus scéalta a insint, dúil sa dúlra, agus cruthaitheacht a léiríodh sa scríbhneoireacht go háirithe. Choinnigh muid cuid mhór dár spontáineacht, ár gcumas a bheith ag scaoileadh amach, ár gcumas a bheith ag gáire, agus ár gcumas ceangal a dhéanamh le daoine eile, go háirithe leo siúd a ndearnadh coilíniú nó leatrom orthu ar bhealaigh eile.

Tá sé tuillte againn a bheith bródúil as na daoine agus na háiteanna as a dtagann muid, agus cé chomh maith agus a rinne muid a laghad agus b’fhéidir linn an crá a bhí againn a chur ar aghaidh chuig daoine eile. Is é an dúshlán atá romhainn glacadh leis an bhfreagairt ár n‑ábhar ansmachta féin a dhíbirt agus dlúthchaidrimh thacúla le fir agus mná Éireannacha eile a thógáil.

LADTA+

Is smaoineamh comhaimseartha é go mbunaítear féiniúlacht shonrach ar mhothúcháin nó gníomhaíochtaí gnéasacha. Ach ní hamhlaidh atá an leatrom ar dhaoine atá páirteach i ngníomhaíochtaí gnéasacha ‘neamhcheadaithe’. (Tá sé suntasach, áfach, gur ghlac Éire Ghaelach go réidh le gnéasachtaí éagsúla.

Bhí pionós an bháis i bhfeidhm i Sasana, sa Bhreatain Bheag agus in Éirinn ó na 1500idí go dtí 1861. In 1885 tugadh an choir ró-mhígheanais isteach agus cuireadh chun feidhme é ar fud Sasana, na Breataine Bige, na hAlban agus na hÉireann. Ní raibh feidhm aige seo ach maidir le gníomhaíocht homaighnéasach na bhfear – ní dhearnadh coir as an leispiachas lena léirítear an gnéasachas nach n‑aithníonn gnéasacht na mban. Nuair a bhain an chuid theas d’Éirinn neamhspleáchas amach ó Shasana fuarthas le hoidhreacht na dlíthe leatromacha a bhí ann cheana maidir le homaighnéasacht. In 1967 nuair a vótáil Parlaimint RA gnéas idir beirt fhear toilteanach príobháideach a dhíchoiriú, bhí feidhm aige seo i Sasana agus sa Bhreatain Bheag, ach ní raibh i dTuaisceart Éireann.

Ba iad faitíos agus rúndacht an cás le haghaidh LADTA+ in Éirinn, Thuaidh agus Theas. D’fhulaing fir aeracha ciapadh ó na póilíní nó gardaí agus treisíodh go mór na dlíthe agus dearcthaí leatromacha ag an eaglais Chaitliceach agus na heaglaisí soiscéalacha Protastúnacha sa Tuaisceart agus sa Deisceart.

Tá na deacrachtaí leatroim Éireannaigh inmheánaithe a leagadh amach níos luaithe sa dréachtpholasaí seo ag Éireannaigh LADTA+ - féinmheas íseal, easpa cumhachta, ceannairí a cháineadh agus araile, ach mar LADTA+ d’fhéadfadh an mhíshástacht shóisialta agus an leithcheal ó aois óg an leatrom Éireannach inmheánaithe a threisiú agus a dhúbláil.

Is leithscéal nó ‘bonn cirt’ í gníomhaíocht ghnéasach don leatrom, ach thosaíonn dearcthaí leatromacha i dtaobh LADTA+ i bhfad roimh aon ghníomhaíocht ghnéasach. Úsáidtear ó aois óg rialacha inscne dochta maidir le céard a dhéanann agus nach ndéanann buachaillí nó cailíní chun gach duine a threorú isteach i ngnás heitrighnéasach. D’fhéadfadh an pionós, sóisialta agus fisiciúil, gan a bheith ag géilleadh an-trom. Fásann a lán daoine LADTA+ aníos ag mothú éagsúil agus, ar bhealach éigin, gránna. Tagann an leatrom seachtrach as an tsochaí i gcoitinne ach as na garghaolta chomh maith lena mbraitear méadú ar an scoiteacht. Le haghaidh roinnt mhaith daoine LADTA+, éiríonn an scoiteacht seo ainsealach agus is éard a leanann as sin rúndacht agus tarraingt i dtreo andúile d’fhonn a bheith ag mothú níos fearr. Na mothúcháin atá ar dhaoine LADTA+ a bheith coimhthíos, a bheith difriúil, agus a bheith gránna, ní féidir an iomarca tábhachta a chur leo. Seo an cás fiú má cheiltear é trí bhraistint áibhéalach ardchéimíochta a ghlacann go leor daoine LADTA+ orthu mar chosaint in aghaidh an leatroim.

Sna 1970idí, thosaigh fir aeracha a eagrú in aghaidh dlíthe leatromacha agus tarraingíodh cásanna anuas sa Chúirt Eorpach um Chearta an Duine. In 1981 rialaigh an Chúirt in aghaidh rialtas RA agus in 1988 rialaigh an Chúirt in aghaidh rialtas na hÉireann. Ach ní athraíodh na dlíthe go dtí 1982 agus 1993. Throid an eaglais Chaitliceach agus na Protastúnaigh shoiscéalacha go láidir in aghaidh na n‑athchóirithe. D’eagraigh an Páirtí Aontachtach Daonlathach feachtas ‘Sábháil Cúige Uladh ar Shodamacht’ i dTuaisceart Éireann. Mar thoradh air sin, d’éirigh rialtas RA as aon phlean na dlíthe i dTuaisceart Éireann a athchóiriú go dtí gur tugadh air déanamh amhlaidh ag an AE.

Sna 1990idí d’athraigh Deisceart na hÉireann go drámatúil, go heacnamaíoch agus go sóisialta, agus d’athraigh an cás do LADTA+ ó bhonn le hathruithe drámatúla ar an dlí sna chéad deacáidí eile. In 2011 toghadh na chéad TDanna a bhí aerach go hoscailte ar an Dáil agus toghadh an chéad seanadóir a bhí leispiach go hoscailte. Aithníodh páirtnéireachtaí sibhialta in 2010 agus in 2015 tharla reifreann maidir le pósadh aerach agus bhí 62% i bhfabhar. Ó bhí mí Iúil 2015 ann, féadann daoine trasinscneacha in Éirinn a n‑inscne a fhéindearbhú i bpasanna, ceadúnais tiomána, teastais bhreithe nua, agus nuair a phósann siad. In 2017 leasaíodh na dlíthe chun lánúineacha comhghnéis a cheadú páistí a uchtú. An tráth sin freisin, toghadh Éire a céad Taoiseach a bhí aerach go hoscailte.

I dTuaisceart Éireann, throid na heaglaisí Caitliceacha agus Protastúnacha in aghaidh aon athrú sa dlí. In ainneoin é seo áfach, bhí dearcthaí sóisialta ag athrú agus phasáil rialtas RA leasú dlí i vótáil chun pósadh comhghnéis a cheadú i dTuaisceart Éireann i mí Eanáir 2020. Is é comhartha an athraithe shóisialta a tharlú é mórshiúl bliantúil Gay Pride. In 1991 tharraing an chéad mhórshiúl 100 duine i mBéal Feirste. In 2019, chuaigh 65,000 ar mhórshiúl trí Bhéal Feirste i léiriú bróid aeraigh agus glactha éagsúlachta.

Sna 1980idí agus 1990idí i mbuaic na ndlíthe agus na ndearcthaí leatromacha bhí pobal láidir LADTA+ in CA, Thuaigh agus Theas. Agus an cás sóisialta agus dlíthiúil ag dul i bhfeabhas, tháinig laghdú ar líon na ndaoine LADTA+ in CA. Is beag daoine LADTA+ sna pobail CA i dTuaisceart agus i nDeisceart na hÉireann faoi láthair. Tá roinnt mhaith cúiseanna leis an laghdú seo ach chun é a athrú is gá go scaoilfidh na comhéisteoirí heitrighnéasacha sa Tuaisceart agus sa Deisceart a n-ábhar ansmachta amach chun é a chur ar a chumas dóibh feidhmiú mar lucht tacaíochta níos fearr.

Aicmeachas

Is féidir féachaint ar stair an leatroim Éireannaigh mar stair leatroim aicme. Tharla concas tosaigh na Normannach ar Éirinn agus forlámhas na Sasanach níos déanaí laistigh de chomhthéacs an chórais fheodaigh. Chonacthas cur i bhfeidhm an chórais sin in Éirinn de réir a chéile, á chur in ionad an chórais chlainne.

Le linn na tréimhse seo, dhíshealbhaigh aicme cheannais nua de dhaoine uaisle, tiarnaí talún, agus cinsealacht Phrotastúnach na hÉireannaigh dhúchasacha agus laghdaigh siad chuig aicme bhocht iad nach raibh ach cumhacht ná acmhainní suaracha acu. Neartaíodh na rudaí seo uile trí dhlíthe éagsúla frith-Éireannacha agus frith-Chaitliceacha.

Bhí iarrachtaí ag an aicme cheannais seo agus ag an meánaicme nua de cheannaithe agus úinéirí talún Caitliceacha níos lú a stádas laistigh den bhunaíocht Shasanach a chosaint san áireamh in éirí amach agus ceannaircí le linn cuid den ama seo. Thug siad a n-aird ar an éagothroime idir Éirinn agus an Bhreatain a laghdú, cumhacht pholaitiúil na haicme ceannais in Éirinn a mhéadú, agus bacainní eacnamaíocha ar thrádálaithe agus tiarnaí talún Éireannacha a bhaint. Ní rabhthas ar siúl go lárnach acu deireadh a chur le leatrom na nÉireannach ina n-iomláine.

Ag céim níos deireanaí, tugadh leis an troid ar son na saoire agus an troid leanúnach ar son Éire aontaithe tosaíocht do dheireadh fhorlámhas na Sasanach, ach ba mhinic nach raibh dearcadh soiléir maidir le saincheisteanna aicmeacha i gcroílár an leatroim. In amanna eile, áfach, tugadh saincheisteanna aicmeacha chun tosaigh sa troid seo. Sa 19ú haois go háirithe, leis an ngluaiseacht Éire Óg agus an Cogadh ar Talamh, agus ar aghaidh sa 20ú haois luath, bhí aicme lárnach do roinnt mhaith gníomhaithe. Chonacthas do roinnt daoine fiú gurbh é lucht oibre na Sasanach comhghuaillí nádúrtha le haghaidh na nÉireannach. Le linn na tréimhse seo freisin, cuireadh saincheisteanna na mban i dtábhacht. Ar an mórgóir, áfach, thángthas ar an tuiscint gur saincheisteanna neamhthosaíochta iad deireadh a chur le leatrom aicme, leatrom na mban agus leatrom eile nó gur saincheisteanna iad nach raibh aghaidh le tabhairt orthu ach nuair a baineadh saoire náisiúnta amach ar dtús.

Ag an bpointe seo, tá an córas eacnamaíochta i dTuaisceart Éireann (mar chuid den Ríocht Aontaithe) agus an Phoblacht (mar chuid den Aontas Eorpach) bunaithe go docht laistigh de shamhail chaipitlíoch. Téann éagothromaíochtaí aicme tríd an tsochaí ó thuaidh agus ó dheas agus léiríonn éagumas an chórais eacnamaíochta an ghéarchéim aeráide a réiteach an gá atá ann athrú a dhéanamh. Cosúil leis an am atá thart, ní saincheist tosaíochta é fós deireadh a chur leis an n‑aicmeachas don chuid is mó de pholaiteoirí agus ní chuirtear aicme san áireamh mar cheann de na catagóirí a chumhdaítear i reachtaíocht dírithe ar éagothroime a dhíothú.

Sa deireadh, ní mór dár saoirse, gan trácht a dhéanamh ar mharthanas an chine dhaonna, na hidirdheighiltí a chuireann an caipitleachas chun cinn a shárú, deireadh a chur le haicmeachas, agus geilleagar níos réasúnaí agus níos daonna a lorg.

Eisimirce

Is cuid shuntasach den eispéireas Éireannach leis na céadta blianta í an eisimirce. Le haghaidh daoine ar an oileán, mhothaigh siad í mar chaillteanas go príomha, agus bhí líon mór daoine ag mothú nach raibh an dara rogha acu ach a dteaghlach agus a muintir a fhágáil. An tráth céanna, áfach, eascraíodh tionchar mór ag Éireannaigh i dtíortha eile as freisin.

I roinnt cásanna, forfheidhmíodh an eisimirce go díreach agus daoine á n-iompar chuig daoirse faoi bhanna i gcoilíneachtaí eile mar gheall ar choireacht líomhnaithe, frithsheasmhacht in aghaidh leatroim go minic. Den chuid is mó, áfach, d’imigh daoine sa tsúil go mbeadh saol nua á dhéanamh acu i dtír nua, rud a raibh cosúlacht air uaireanta gurbh é an t-aon bhealach amháin ar aghaidh. Chuaigh roinnt mhaith acu chuig pobail Éireannacha i dtíortha eile, chuig muintir agus comharsana a d’imigh rompu agus b’fhéidir a sheol airgead ar ais sa chaoi is gurbh fhéidir leo taisteal. Go ginearálta, d’imigh daoine agus mothúcháin le scaoileadh amach orthu agus lean siad ar aghaidh chun a bheith gnóthach le saol nua, gan spás chun brón a dhéanamh. Léiríodh na mothúcháin chaillteanais in amhráin agus scéalta na bpobal eisimirceach nua.

Le tamall anuas, rinneadh normalú ar eisimirce, agus imíonn go leor daoine ón tír agus deiseanna agus caighdeán saoil níos fearr á lorg acu. Cibé acu éigeantach nó roghnach, tá roinnt mhaith mothúcháin ceangailte leis an eisimirce atá fós le scaoileadh amach, orthu siúd a imíonn agus orthu a fhanann.

Éireannaigh i dTíortha Éagsúla

Bhí taithí na ndaoine a chuaigh ar imirce éagsúil ó thír go tír. Den chuid is mó, chuaigh Éireannaigh ar imirce chuig tíortha a raibh daoine geala, Protastúnacha, a labhair Béarla ina bhformhór in éineacht lena gcultúr agus bhí tionchar aige sin ar na hinimircigh nua Éireannacha.

Bhí eisimircigh Éireannacha sa 19ú haois ag lorg tearmainn i dtíortha ina ndiúltaigh daoine go minic a ndaonnacht a aithint agus a d’fhéach orthu mar ghrúpa eitneach ar leithligh. Is amhlaidh a bhí sé dóibh siúd go háirithe a chuaigh ar imirce go dtí an Bhreatain Mhór, ach bhí sé ann i dtíortha eile amhail na Stáit Aontaithe, Ceanada agus an Astráil, áiteanna ina ndíorthaíodh an chumhacht ba mhó ó leathadh Sasanach Protastúnach. Ba é an leatrom ba shoiléire agus ba throma é an leatrom in aghaidh Éireannaigh Chaitliceacha dhúchasacha. Agus institiúid na sclábhaíochta rompu, táirgeadh margadh crua d’inimircigh Éireannacha chuig na Stáit Aontaithe, mar shampla, taobhú le daoine d’oidhreacht Eorpach eile chun daonnacht na ndaoine dúchasacha agus na ndaoine d’oidhreacht Afracach a dhiúltú, ag éirí ‘geal’ nó ag leanúint a bheith faoi bhagairt, faoi ionsaí agus fágtha amach.

Maidir le Caitlicigh Éireannacha i dtíortha ina labhraíodh an Béarla, bhí leatrom leanúnach ann, bunaithe ar reiligiún, bochtaineacht agus cultúr. Is minic gur fhan pobail inimirceacha gar dá chéile mar thoradh air seo, ag déanamh iarracht reiligiún agus cultúr a choinneáil agus a gcosa fúthu acu in eacnamaíocht agus cultúr na tíre nua.

Bhí roinnt mhaith Éireannach ag obair i bpoist ar phá íseal, mar shearbhónta agus oibrithe láimhe, agus an obair ba shalaí agus ba dheacra go fisiciúil á déanamh acu go minic. D’fhéadfaí féachaint ar a dtoilteanas a bheith ag obair do phá ar bith arb fhéidir leo a fháil mar an bonn a bhaint ó choinníollacha a bhuaigh oibrithe sna tíortha sin cheana féin. Ach lean an traidisiún ar aghaidh troid in gcoinne éagóra, agus le himeacht ama bhí na hinimircigh Éireannacha i neart tíortha feiceálach i dtroideanna ar son chearta na n-oibrithe agus cearta eile. Is iomaí duine a choinnigh an ceangail leis na troideanna leanúnacha in Éirinn, ar leibhéal an duine (trí airgead a sheoladh abhaile, mar shampla) agus ar leibhéal na polaitíochta. Coimeádadh amhráin agus ceol Éireannach beo agus bhí siad ina n-acmhainn do dhaoine sa bhaile in Éirinn.

Le haghaidh roinnt daoine a chuaigh ar imirce, bhí teann éadóchais orthu a bheith ar nós gach duine eile sa tsochaí, nó ar a laghad cuma ‘mheasúil’ a bheith orthu agus gan a bheith bainteach le steiréitíopaí an Éireannachais a bhí an-fhorleathan agus maslach. Is minic gur fhan a scéalta pearsanta agus stair a muintire i bhfolach ar agus dofheicthe do chairde nua agus glúnta nua a dteaghlach féin ina dtír nua. Tháinig brú mar thoradh air ar a bpáistí comhshamhlú go hiomlán agus ag iarraidh feabhas a chur ar a saol.

Fágadh patrúin foréigin, mhí-úsáid alcóil, nó féinscriosta a léiríodh amach sa teach ar dhaoine mar gheall ar dhífhostaíocht, an strus a bhain le saol i gcultúr coimhthíoch agus meas faoina luach acu ag an obair, chuathas tharstu nuair a bhí ardú céime á thabhairt, nó bhain siad ardú céime amach ach mhothaigh siad mar phasadóirí, nó féachadh orthu mar sceimhlitheoirí féideartha.

Ní raibh d’acmhainn ag go leor eisimircigh, nó bhí siad róshuaite mar gheall ar a dtáthaí, chun filleadh abhaile. Tháinig strus agus deacrachtaí mothúchán as an bhfíordheighilt agus caillteanas freisin.

An rud ar a smaoiníodh mar phobail inimirceacha Éireannacha i dtíortha ina raibh Protastúnaigh agus an Béarla i gceannas, ba phobail Chaitliceacha iad go príomha, agus bhí Éireannaigh inimirceacha Phrotastúnacha dofheicthe den chuid is mó le linn tréimhse de roinnt glúnta. Bhí eisceachtaí ann, amhail an tOrd Oráisteach i gcodanna Sasana agus na hAlban agus na hÉireannaigh Albanacha (nó Scotch Irish) i Meiriceá Thuaidh. Ba de shliocht na bProtastúnach Uladh iad an dara grúpa a chuaigh ar imirce sna 18ú agus 19ú haoiseanna agus a bhí chun tosaigh i roinnt mhaith gnéithe choilíniú Mheiriceá Thuaidh ag inimircigh gheala Eorpacha. Cé gur comhshamhlaíodh cuid mhór mar ‘Mheiriceánacha’ iad, go méid áirithe fanann pobal agus cultúr ‘Scotch-Irish’ so-aitheanta fós.

An lá atá inniu ann, i measc cuid mhór againn a chuaigh ar imirce, nó atá inár bpáistí nó de shliocht eisimirceach, is mór againn Éire agus a sláinte. Is féidir go bhfuil mothúcháin éagsúla orainn le scaoileadh amach lena n-áirítear brón maidir lenar cailleadh agus tábhacht an cheangail a bheith inár nÉireannach. Is féidir, áfach, go bhfuil dearcadh as dáta agus in amanna rómánsúil againn ar Éirinn, bunaithe ar thaithí ár sinsear in ionad ar an bhfírinne atá ann faoi láthair. Is féidir gur gá dúinn dul i ngleic leis an maíomh agus na mothúcháin inmheánaithe nach Éireannaigh ár ndóthain muid nó nach Éireannaigh i ndáiríre muid ar chor ar bith. Dá bhrí sin is cuid thábhachtach dár saoirse an fhéiniúlacht seo a aiséileamh go hiomlán.

Leatrom Leanúnach na nÉireannach

Níor fágadh le baint amach neamhspleáchais pholaitiúil le haghaidh na sé chontae is fiche de chuid na Poblachta go raibh deireadh le leatrom na nÉireannach. Sa saol comhaimseartha, fanann gnéithe an leatroim stairiúil, amhail an chlaontacht frith-Éireannach a fhulaingíonn Éireannaigh sa Bhreatain Mhór agus an neamhaird a thugtar ar thionchar polasaithe Briotanacha, amhail an Breatimeacht, i dTuaisceart Éireann agus sa Phoblacht araon.

Tagann cineálacha leatroim eile ann chomh maith. Cultúr pobail, luachanna, teanga, agus tosaíochtaí phríomhchumhachtaí Limistéar an Bhéarla, mar a thugtar orthu in amanna, an Bhreatain Mhór agus na Stáit Aontaithe go háirithe, in éineacht lena gcumhacht eacnamaíoch, téann siad in iomaíocht leis an gcultúr, luachanna, teanga, tosaíochtaí, agus neamhspleáchas dúchasach Éireannach agus faigheann siad an ceann is fearr orthu go minic. Oibríonn an tionchar seachtrach seo mar chineál coilíneachais chultúrtha agus, go háirithe, eacnamaíoch agus tá sé i bhfad níos téaltaithí ná an coilíneachas stairiúil, míleata agus lonnaitheora.

Táthar ag teacht ar an tuiscint go bhfuil cultúr, luachanna, agus teanga Limistéar an Bhéarla níos fearr, níos suntasaí, níos suimiúla, níos tarraingtí agus níos ábhartha ná cultúr, luachanna, agus teanga thraidisiúnta Éireannach. Agus é seo á inmheánú, treisítear an leatrom inmheánaithe stairiúil a léirítear sa chultúr fós.

Tá dúshlán chineál nua an choilíneachais seo roinnte le neart pobail dhúchasacha eile agus náisiúin nach bhfuil chomh cumhachtach céanna nó a bhfuil níos boichte. Baineann cuid dár saoirse le comhghuaillíochtaí agus dlúthcheangail a thógáil leo, comhghuaillithe nádúrtha dár gcuid.

Mar a chonaic muid sa roinn Cé Atá Ionann, agus féiniúlacht Éireannach ag éirí níos éagsúla, tagann cineálacha nua leatroim Éireannaigh ann sa bhreis ar leatrom stairiúil na nÉireannach dúchasach. Cuid d’obair leanúnach shaoirse na nÉireannach is ea na cineálacha nua leatroim seo a shainaithint agus a scaoileadh amach anuas ar na cineálacha leatroim atá ann faoi láthair dá dtagraítear sa roinn seo.

Lucht Tacaíochta

Cúpla uair seoladh airm de chuid na bhFrancach agus na Spáinneach chun cabhrú le cúis shaoirse na nÉireannach ó Shasana. Níos gaire dár linn, bhí an tacaíocht ó dhaoine na Stát Aontaithe agus an Aontais Eorpaigh tábhachtach chun síocháin a bhaint amach in Éirinn. Is é an cás gur fágadh lenár leatrom inmheánaithe nach bhfuil roinnt mhaith againn ag súil le lucht tacaíochta a bheith againn. Is príomhchuid den phróiseas saoirse le haghaidh aon ghrúpa faoi chois, áfach, lucht tacaíochta a bhuachan.

Is féidir le lucht tacaíochta páirt dháiríre a ghlacadh i Saoirse na nÉireannach ar bhealaigh éagsúla. Ceann de na bealaigh sin is ea rud éigin a fhoghlaim faoinár stair, ár dtíreolaíocht, agus ár gcultúr. Cuidíonn sé má dhéanann siad cairdeas le hÉireannaigh aonair agus má tá siad in ann cineáltas a thaispeáint inár dtreo. Is féidir leo cuidiú linn cur le buanna an chultúir Éireannaigh, a ghaois a roinnt, agus éifeachtaí an leatroim frith-Éireannaigh stairiúil agus reatha a leigheas.

Tá sé cabhrach má tá machnamh réchúiseach ag ár lucht tacaíochta comhéisteachta agus iad ag éist linn maidir le saincheisteanna amhail ár n-intleacht agus ár dtábhacht, foréigean agus ár n-imní roimhe (é a bheith dírithe orainn nó a dhíríonn muid ar dhaoine eile), andúil agus éifeachtaí eile ó chinedhíothú agus bochtaineacht, agus cé chomh tábhacht atá sé leis an nÉireannach a fhéiniúlacht Éireannach a mhaíomh go hiomlán. Tá sé cabhrach freisin má tá siad in ann a bheith ina suaimhneas faoi reiligiún agus féiniúlacht reiligiúnach agus faoi chórais chreidimh a d’fhéadfadh a bheith nó nach bhféadfadh a bheith chomh forleathan agus a bhí siad tráth. Is féidir leo cur i gcuimhne dúinn aire a thabhairt dúinn féin agus muid ag déanamh tiomantais do dhaoine eile gan an tiomantas sin a laghdú agus muid á dhéanamh. D’fhéadfaí a áireamh leis seo a bheith réchúiseach tharainn agus muid ag dul i ngleic le géarchéimeanna inár saolta. D’fhéadfadh siad cuimhneamh agus cur i gcuimhne dúinn chomh maith, gurb uirlis í Comhéisteacht Athmheasúnaithe (CA) le haghaidh maireachtáil níos fearr agus ag obair i gcomhar linn agus muid á cur i bhfeidhm inár n-obair shaoirse Éireannaí agus inár saolta.

Is féidir le lucht tacaíochta ról tábhacht a ghlacadh nuair a athdhéanann Éireannaigh deighilteachas nó ionsaithe ar cheannairí. D’fhéadfadh lucht tacaíochta é a dhéanamh ar an mbealach is fearr nuair atá dea-chaidrimh le hÉireannaigh tógtha acu cheana féin. Is dúshlán maith agus taithí an-tairbheach do dhuine neamhÉireannach an ‘obair a dhéanamh’ chun a bheith ina chomhghuaillí den sórt sin.

Maidir le lucht tacaíochta Sasanach agus SAM, go háirithe, nuair a chinneann siad obair a dhéanamh ar a bhféiniúlacht Shasanach nó SAM agus an t-ábhar ansmachta a bhaineann leo, déanfaidh sé difear mór.

Aontacht

Is cuspóir ag roinnt mhaith Éireannaigh í aontacht na hÉireann a bhaint amach agus ag fáil réidh le críochdheighilt, cé go gcuireann neart daoine eile ina aghaidh, i dTuaisceart Éireann go háirithe.

Tá sé tábhachtach idirdhealú a dhéanamh idir aontacht pholaitiúil nó struchtúrach agus aontacht na ndaoine, cé go bhfuil dlúthcheangal eatarthu. I bhfianaise na ndeighiltí doimhne stairiúla agus an bhagairt frithsheasmhachta foréigní, ní dócha go n-oibreofaí aontacht pholaitiúil nó struchtúrach gan aontacht leordhóthanach na ndaoine. Ar an gcúis sin, is príomhcheist í aontacht na ndaoine a thógáil le haghaidh saoirse Éireannach, i.e., ceist a bhogann gach rud eile ar aghaidh. Na polasaithe agus na tionscnaimh uile ar dhócha go ndéanfadh siad difear suntasach do shochaí na hÉireann, cibé acu a thagann siad ón taobh istigh an oileáin nó ón taobh amuigh, caithfear iad a mheas ó thaobh a oiread agus a chríochnaíonn siad deighiltí agus éagóracha stairiúla, agus a thugann siad daoine níos gaire le chéile.

Go stairiúil, a lán sochaithe dúchasacha ar a ndearnadh coilíniú, cuimsíonn siad anois na coilínithe agus a sliochtaigh lena gcultúir féin. Inár stair le déanaí agus faoi láthair, cuimsíonn sochaí na hÉireann sliochtaigh na gcoilínithe in éineacht le hinimircigh níos déanaí ag a bhfuil éagsúlacht d’oidhreachtaí cultúrtha, de dhóchas agus d’eagla. Is dúshlán suntasach ach indéanta é imeascadh na gcodanna daoine seo ar an oileán.

An Fhírinne Fúinn

Murab ionann agus a deirtear leis an leatrom, tá Éireannaigh, fearacht daoine uile, suntasach, luachmhar, agus go maith. I measc tréithe eile a chothaigh ár gcultúr, tá muid éirimiúil, cróga, cairdiúil, croíúil, agus ceanúil. Léirítear na tréithe seo inár n-ealaín, ár litríocht, ár gceol, ár dteanga, agus ár gcaidrimh.

Rinne muid, agus déanann muid fós, rannchuidithe móra le folláine agus saoirse na ndaoine ar fud an domhain.

Cé gur as oileán beag ar imeall na hEorpa muid, tá an-tábhacht ag baint le saoirse na nÉireannach i dtroid na ngrúpaí uile ar son na saoirse. Tá dearcadh luachmhar againn maidir le coilíneachas agus le himpiriúlachas agus maidir le hidirdheighiltí a shárú. Tuigeann muid go soiléir freisin tábhacht na ndaoine as SAM agus Sasana a bheith ag obair ar a stair tíoránaigh agus meas a bheith acu an tráth céanna ar fhíormhaitheas a ndaoine féin.

Ár bhFís

Tá sé d’aidhm againn, in éineacht lenár lucht tacaíochta, sochaí a chruthú ina bhfuil gach Éireannach, ar oileán na hÉireann nó in áit eile, tiomanta do shaoirse a chéile agus urramú iomlán á léiriú againn ar éagsúlacht an chultúir, na teanga, an reiligiúin, agus an traidisiúin ar saintréithe iad dár ndaoine.

Tá sé d’aidhm againn sochaí shíochánta a chruthú a bhfuil cóir agus sábháilte do gach duine gan faitíos roimh ionsaí ná baol báis. Glacann muid leis nach bhfuil coinbhleacht leasa bhunúsach idir daoine aonair ná idir grúpaí Éireannach. Is i gcónaí a bhíonn ionsaithe ar Éireannaigh eile fréamhaithe i gcrá agus léiriú ar ár leatrom agus ár leatrom inmheánaithe.

Aithníonn muid saibhreas na héagsúlachta gur ann inár measc agus tá sé d’aidhm againn go nglacann muid go hionchuimsitheach agus go measúil le grúpaí uile a bhfuil ina gcónaí ar oileán na hÉireann nó a bhfuil féiniúlacht Éireannach acu, cibé áit ina gcónaíonn siad. Leis an dearcadh seo is féidir ‘Éireannachas’ a shainmhíniú laistigh de chomhthéacs iolraíoch a chuimsíonn na traidisiúin uile atá ann cheana agus lúcháir agus bród á gcur orthu. Tá muid tiomanta tacaíocht a thabhairt d’Éireannaigh eile a bhfuil traidisiúin acu atá difriúil lenár gcinn féin agus gach rud atá luachmhar agus saibhir inár n-oidhreachtaí faoi seach a aiséileamh agus a cheiliúradh.

Agus ceachtanna ónár dtroideanna féin á bhfoghlaim againn, tá sé d’aidhm againn eiseamláir a sholáthar don domhan conas dul i ngleic le saincheisteanna sóisialta deighilteacha uile, lena n‑áirítear aicmeachas, ciníochas, gnéasachas, frith-Sheimíteachas, leatrom ar LADTA+, cumasachas, aoiseachas, seineafóibe, agus seicteachas. Is príomhghné é chun saincheisteanna den sórt sin a réiteach aird a thabhairt ar réaltacht dhaonnacht gach duine.

Tá sé d’aidhm againn a bheith ag obair go dlúth le daoine i ngach áit, an lucht oibre go háirithe, i dtreo na n-aidhmeanna seo a bhaint amach. Is bunús láidir le haghaidh lucht tacaíochta a thógáil é fís leathan a bheith againn a thugann dúshlán an leatroim agus na n-institiúidí uile a bhuanaíonn polasaithe mídhaonna. Aithníonn muid an deis ar leith atá ag Éireannaigh i dtíortha eile chun comhghuaillíochtaí a thógáil mar thaca lenár n-aidhmeanna.

Last modified: 2024-09-17 23:46:47+00

News flash