Bhí an Ghaeilge mar chuid de Choláiste na hOllscoile, BÁC, ó 1854 nuair a múineadh é mar chuid de churaclam na dána. Nuair a d’iompaigh an ollscoil ina institiúid stáit in 1908 bhí an teanga mar chuid foirmeáilte den struchtúr acadúil.

Le linn an fhichiú haois bhí léachtóirí Gaeilge na hollscoile lárnach i gcur chun cinn agus caomhnú na Gaeilge. Tá Cartlann Béaloideasa na hÉireann, a chaomhnaíonn oidhreacht scéalaíochta agus béaloideasa na tíre, lonnaithe san ollscoil.

Bunaíodh An Cumann Gaelach sna 1920í. Bhí neart feachtais síos trí na blianta don chomharthaíocht agus ar son feiceálacht na Gaeilge, ach go háirithe ó na 1960í ar aghaidh.

Ach ainneoin cumhacht agus saibhreas na hollscoile, ba mhinic a raibh tacaíocht institiúideach don teanga lag go leor. Ba iad na mic léinn a chur póstaeir in airde, a reáchtáil imeachtaí agus a d’eagraigh agóidí Gaeilge, a choinnigh an Ghaeilge beo ar an gcampas agus a rinne dul chun cinn ar son na teanga.

Má theastaíonn uait páirt a glac in eagraíocht atá dírithe ar tuilleadh díchoilíniú a chur i gcríoch i gColáiste na hOllscoile, BÁC, bígí i dteagmháil linn inniu.

Tá SAM ag “ceiliúradh” 250 bliain a bhunaithe i mbliana. Ach déantar dearmad, i measc na nÉireannach atá faoi gheasa ag an áit ach go háirithe, gur bunaíodh SAM ar chinedhíothú dream amháin agus daoradh chun sclábhaíochta dream eile.

Tá torthaí na bpróiseas seo fós le brath i ngach gné de chultúr, sochaí agus polaitíocht SAM. Tá an ciníochas fite fuaite le saol laethúil SAM go fóill. Cé gur tháinig deireadh foirmiúil leis an sclábhaíocht in 1865 agus gur cuireadh an fhrithbheartaíocht bhundúchasach faoi chois ar deireadh in 1890 ag Wounded Knee, tá an meon a chuir bonn faoi na córais sin fós ann go smior i measc codanna móra den tsochaí.

Ar feadh níos mó ná 200 bliain bhí an ciníochas nasctha go dlúth le sochaí an Deiscirt. Sa chaoi chéanna, breathnaíodh ar na Bundúchasaigh mar dhream a gcaithfí fáil réidh leo chun “an náisiún” a leathnú amach.

Fiú dá mbeadh an t-ádh ar na hAfrai-Mheiriceánaigh nó Bundúchasaigh a bheith “saor” ní raibh meas madra orthu sa tsochaí ná sa stát.

Cuireadh na Bundúchasaigh go scoileanna cónaithe inar fáisceadh a gcultúr agus a dteangacha amach astu. Achtaíodh dlíthe Jim Crow i gcoinne na nAfrai-Mheiriceánach fiú i ndiaidh dheireadh chóras na sclábhaíochta.

Tá an creideamh i “ciníocha” bitheolaíocha, coincheap atá gan bunús eolaíoch, ar cheann de na hoidhreachtaí is contúirtí den sclábhaíocht. Ach glactar go forleathan leis an bhféinaithint chiníoch. Tá catagóirí amhail Geal, Dubh, Áiseach, agus Bundúchasach fós in úsáid, cé gur trí reachtaíocht choilíneach in Virginia agus Tuaisceart Carolina a cumadh iad an chéad lá. Ba é an creideamh san fhorchiníochas Geal agus an beag is fiú de dhaoine Dubha agus Bundúchasacha bunús chiníochas SAM.

Ní “rogha” a bhaineann leis an duine aonair é an ciníochas. I ndiaidh dó a bheith á threisiú ar feadh na nglúnta, feidhmíonn sé ar bhonn cultúrtha, institiúideach, agus ar bhonn aonair:

1. Neartaíonn an ciníochas cultúrtha tuiscintí faoin gcéimlathas ciníoch sa saol laethúil
2. Aistríonn an ciníochas institiúideach na tuiscintí sin, ar bhealach éagothrom, isteach i réimsí an oideachais, na tithíochta, na fostaíochta agus na póilíneachta.
3. Coinníonn an ciníochas aonarach, bíodh sin go coinsiasach nó go fothchoinsiasach, na córais seo in situ

Nuair a thógtar na trí ghné seo san áireamh, bíonn praghas mór síceolaíochta agus sláinte le híoc acu siúd a fhulaingíonn dá bharr. Ar an mbealach seo, déantar gortuithe stairiúla na sclábhaíochta agus an chinedhíothaithe a threisiú sa lá atá inniu ann.

Tháinig an staraí Raphaël Lemkin aníos leis an téarma “cinedhíothú”. Agus é ag forbairt an téama, bhí staidéar ar scrios na mBundúchasach agus daoradh chun sclábhaíochta na nAfrai-Mheiriceánach ar bun aige. D’áitigh sé gur dhírigh an cinedhíothú ar ghrúpaí, seachas ar dhaoine aonair, agus é mar aidhm “cuid nó an t-iomlán acu a scrios”. Faoin sainmhíniú seo, is cinedhíothú a bhí sa sclábhaíocht agus i scrios na mBundúchasach.

Cuireadh bac ar sclábhaithe Afrai-Mheiriceánacha a dteangacha, ainmneacha agus reiligiún a úsáid, nó a gcultúr a choinneáil. Maraíodh iad nuair a dhiúltaigh siad. Fuair siad bás den ocras, deineadh ciapadh agus éigniú orthu agus cuireadh bac orthu clanna a thógáil. Díoladh páistí ar nós sclábhaí airnéise agus scaradh iad óna dtuismitheoirí.

Tagann na gníomhartha le sainmhíniú Lemkin ar an gcinedhíothú: marú baill ghrúpa, díobháil thromchúiseach a dhéanamh do chorp nó meabhair, cosc a chur ar bhreitheanna, agus páistí a aistriú trí fhórsa.

Tá ceist an raibh an rún ann dul i mbun an chinedhíothaithe, atá lárnach i sainmhíniú na Náisiún Aontaithe, soiléir sna taifid staire. Mhaígh úinéirí na sclábhaithe go hoscailte go raibh an ceart acu sa mhéid a rinne siad de bharr ísleacht na sclábhaithe.

Chreid siad go raibh an bhrúidiúlacht a d’úsáid siad de dhíth agus chun leasa an chórais. Léiríonn lámhleabhair, litreacha agus tráchtaireacht phoiblí straitéisí soiléire chun na sclábhaithe a choinneáil faoi smacht.

Bhí pátrún den chineál céanna mar a bhain sé le léirscrios na mBundúchasach. Roimh theacht na nEorpach, meastar go raibh 2 mhilliún Bundúchasach ina gcónaí san áit a d’fhorbródh isteach sna SAM.

Faoi 1890, ní raibh fágtha ach 8%-12% acu. Cé go raibh ról áirithe ag galair, ba iad na feachtais mhíleata, na háir, an t-aistriú trí fhórsa, agus goid talún a bhí mar an cor cinniúnach. Ceann i ndiaidh a chéile, chlis ar na náisiúin Bhundúchasacha, scriosadh a ndaonraí, agus cuireadh iad siúd a tháinig slán i bhfad ar shiúl óna dtailte dúchasacha.

Tá na héagóracha seo fós ina chnámh spairne agus ina cheist bheo nach bhfuil córas caipitlíoch-coilíneach SAM sásta, nó in ann fiú, a réiteach. Mar sin, ná ceiliúraimis 250 de SAM ná ról na nÉireannach a chruthaigh an impireacht sin.

Seasaimis leis na pobail atá ag fulaingt go fóill de bharr na himpireachta agus gníomhaímis chun titim na himpireachta céanna a fheiceáil.

Thug Rúnaí Misneach, Kerron Ó Luain, óráid uaidh ag comhdháil dár dteideal “Winning Our Futures” a d’eagraigh ICEC agus an Radical Independence Convention i nDún Éideann ar an 5ú Deireadh Fómhair. Tháinig ionadaithe as 15 náisiún atá faoi chois nó gan stát san Eoraip le chéile chun dul i mbun plé stráitéiseach faoi thodhchaí na Mór Roinne.

Móran taing, go raibh míle maith agaibh, thank you, for your invitation to speak on Ireland’s past, present, and future. Over the next few minutes, I’ll provide an overview of the key issues shaping the nation’s trajectory.

Ireland’s history is deeply intertwined with colonization, especially from the sixteenth century onwards when it became a testing ground for British imperialism. English policies aimed to suppress Irish language, culture, and political autonomy. The “plantation” policies, for instance, displaced native Irish populations, and in schools, Irish children were subjected to indoctrination, such as reciting verses that celebrated being “a happy English child.” The goal was clear: to either assimilate or eradicate Irish identity.

The British were only partially successful as various forms of resistance emerged over time—some militant, some constitutional, and others focused on cultural and linguistic preservation.

However, the struggle for independence was also only partially successful. The Irish Revolution of 1916-1923 ended with partial autonomy for 26 of the 32 counties, but partition left the North under a supremacist Protestant government. Britain maintained influence in the South by supporting conservative forces during the 1922-23 Civil War. As a result, Kevin O’Higgins, one of the leaders of the conservative wing, later claimed they were “the most conservative-minded revolutionaries that ever put through a successful revolution.”

The legacy of colonialism, and the failure to forge a truly radical path, still haunts Ireland. The division of the island has stifled democracy, rather than stimulating it, and exacerbated economic imbalances. The West, where the Irish language remains strongest, has been hit hard by emigration due to a lack of economic opportunities, while Dublin dominates much of the country’s economic activity. Meanwhile, the Irish elite, often serving the interests of global financial powers rather than the local population, have shifted their allegiances from Britain to U.S. multinational corporations.

This has led to an economy overly reliant on foreign direct investment, with dire consequences for ordinary people. Housing, healthcare, education, and the cost of living are in crisis, and this has left room for the rise of fascism. In the North, the intransigence and threats of Unionist elements hold back self-determination, progressive change and deny Irish speakers their basic language rights.

In the South, the use of Shannon Airport for the transport of arms to the Israeli Zionist state, facilitating the slaughter of Palestinians, and the increasing military influence of NATO, the EU, and the US, threatens Ireland’s long-standing policy of neutrality. This policy, rooted in an anti-colonial understanding and a rejection of empire, is at risk of being undermined

The Scottish Gaelic poet Sorley MacLean once referred to the “bitter legacy” of colonialism, noting how it endangered indigenous languages, drove emigration, and empowered “the porters of international big business.” This same colonial legacy continues to shape Ireland’s struggles today.

That said, if autonomy had not been gained in 1922, the challenges facing Ireland – particularly the social problems I alluded to – would, without doubt, be far greater, and neutrality would not even exist. We would be unwilling participants in Empire.

Looking to the future, there is reason for optimism. Demographic shifts in the North of Ireland have made the possibility of a united Ireland more realistic than ever before. Even right-wing and centrist political parties in the South have little opposition to the idea, though many underestimate the challenges ahead.

The Good Friday Agreement of 1998 stipulates that a referendum on reunification can only take place if the British Secretary of State for Northern Ireland believes a majority would vote in favour of it—a hurdle that will not be easily overcome.

While Ireland has come a long way from its days under colonial rule, the country still grapples with the effects of that inheritance. Nevertheless, with increasing momentum towards reunification and an increasingly left-leaning youth, not as shackled by a post-colonial syndrome as previous generations, the country stands at a pivotal moment in its history.

James Connolly, born in Scotland to Irish parents in Cowgate in this city, spoke about a rejection of centralised and imperial states when he referred to ‘a free federation of free peoples’. Ireland, like the other nations gathered here today, has an opportunity to forge such a ‘free federation’ in the coming years. In fact, we must – the alternatives will be catastrophic. So we must struggle for self-determination, democracy, for the republic and for true decolonisation, free from external influence and Empire. Bíodh Misneach againn. Beir Bua.

Seo thíos litir a scríobh ball de chuid Misneach, Ben Ó Ceallaigh, a foilsíodh i nuachtán ar an Oileán Mhanann. Cé go mbaineann an t-ábhar le heachtra ar leith ar an oileán, tá lón machnaimh sa litir do gach éinne atá ag plé le cúrsaí frith-faisisteacha sa Ghaeltacht, sna tíortha Ceilteacha agus níos faide i gcéin.

The recent publicity given by The Isle of Man Examiner to a dangerous fascist group which is actively trying to recruit on the island, including reproducing their leaflets in full and distributing them on social media, shows a blatant disregard for the welfare of those targeted by fascists and a complete lack of understanding of how these ideas take root. Indeed, the front page of the paper was described by one of the leaders of the group as “amazing publicity” in a recent social media post.

While most readers will recognise fascist ideas for the bile that they are, it only takes a small percentage to be persuaded for people’s lives to be at very real risk. Famously, in the week after the leader of the fascist British National Party was disgraced on Question Time in 2009, 3,000 people applied to join the party – a tiny percentage of the eight million who watched, but a huge increase in absolute numbers for a fringe neo-nazi group. This is the risk of publicising ideas that present an existential threat to all that is decent in society. Across the world, laws proscribe hate speech, incitement to violence and other unacceptable actions such as marketing tobacco to children – very few people are truly “free speech absolutists” who oppose such measures. Likewise, such is the nature of the “paradox of tolerance”, as philosopher Karl Popper called it, that we must not extend freedom of speech to fascists, who will deny this very right to others at the first chance. Reproducing their propaganda and circulating it to a huge audience as The Isle of Man Examiner has done is politically illiterate and utterly ignorant of the nature of the fascist threat. This matter is especially serious given the context of the recent fearmongering about sex education in the QEII High School in Peel.

Groups such as the one recently reported on aim to sow division and hate, scapegoating the most vulnerable in society for problems which are caused by an economic system that makes the lives of so many so difficult. In presenting immigrants and refugees as responsible for issues such as the housing crisis or austerity, fascists serve as useful idiots for the powerful, distracting attention from the real source of people’s woes. As Max Horkheimer, a Jewish refugee from nazi Germany, famously wrote in 1939, “whoever is not prepared to talk about capitalism should also remain silent about fascism”.

As has often been noted, rather than beginning with death camps, fascism ends with them. By giving such an enormous platform to a nauseating white supremacist group, the Isle of Man Examiner has unwittingly contributed to the growth of this ideology, and in doing so put at risk immigrants, people of colour, LGBT+ people, trade unionists and many more who fall afoul of the disgusting ideas spread by fascist groups. Let this mistake not be made again, and all their propaganda removed from the paper’s online presence immediately.

Anti-fascism is self-defence. No pasarán – cha jed ad shaghey!

An Dr. Ben Ó Ceallaigh

Ollscoil Aberystwyth