Ireland's Slavery Memorial Day?

Worldbystorm

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
321
Cael said:
Yes, what we call "normal" is a neurotic structure i.e. repression and isolation are the main mechanisms we use to deal with difficult situations or traumatic events. The massive avertion this individual (ive forgotten his name) showed towards the passive position is typical of an obsessive organisation and the overuse of isolation. I didnt say he suffered from obsessive neurosis.
No, but isn't this based very much on your reading of Freud. For example, someone might come at this from the opposite direction and say it was you who exhibited classic symptoms of obsessive neurosis, or even everyday 'normal' neuroses - after all denial is a knife that cuts both ways in any argument.

Freud wrote quite a lot about group psychology. He went much farther than I am here. He traces the paradigm of the Oedipus Complex right back to a mythical murder of the primal father of the horde by his sons and the eating of his flesh. This, according to Freud, led to the mothers and sisters of the horde becoming forbidden to the sons and thus the inception of the taboo on incest. As it happens I wasnt applying the theory of obsessive structure to all Irish people - just certain individuals who constantly display it.
Actually Freud didn't deal with 'peoples' per se. He dealt with groups - a rather different thing.

I could give many answers to this. Maybe the best one is the one given by Joyce in the episode with the "tundish" in, I think, if my memory serves me right, Portrait of the Artist. He describes how the English language could never have the confidence in his mouth as in the mouth of the English visiting teacher. Its traumatic for any people to be condemned to this distance from the language they use as a mother tongue. As I said above, you only have to listen to the accents used in the commercial radio stations - particularly the news readers, its as if nobody could take the news seriously if it were read in an Irish accent.
But that doesn't answer the question of how does that 'trauma' hold up across 150 years? Do you consider that accents don't change under the influence of various factors. For example, probably like you I find it extremely annoying to hear some of the mangling of an Irish accent by DORT and other sub-accents, but then again I talk to people from around the country and regional accents remain strong. Again I wonder if you're not confusing class with national identity.

I think something is happening now which is quite healthy. More and more people are learning Irish, and other languages, and they begin to see language as relative. Another great thing is that people are using the bit of Irish they have learned and are not intimidated by the ideal of perfect fluency. As Pearse said, we want to speak Irish, not because there is anything wrong with English, but because it is our own Irish language.
Yes, I agree with you. Gaelscoileanna are a good thing, the use of Irish or even phrases is a good thing. However, it strikes me that at best we'll achieve a sort of bilingualism still pitched towards the anglophone.


I think you are right in saying that people will buy into developements named in Irish. One of the most popular developments in Castleknock is called "Donn Rua". In regard to the USA, Im afraid they havent entirely gotten over their colonial relationship with the "mother country". Im afraid the Irish have a lot further to go in this than the Americans, but they have had a big head start its true.
Again I agree with you. And I very much agreed with you re local placenames on a different thread. I don't know about the US, seeing as the vast majority of their population isn't even descended from the English I'm still fairly sure that any manifestations we see there are drawn from concepts of 'class' or 'sophistication'.

So are you saying that the modern Armenians dont feel any hurt or Jews born since the end of WW2?

Actually commemoration is quite analogous to the kind of remembering and working through that we find in the clinic.
No, for an obvious reason. Even the Armenian genocide is within barely living memory. People alive today knew people who were hurt by it. But the hurt of the contemporary Armenians who didn't experience it is obviously going to be much lesser than those who went through it. Another generation or two and it's lost to 'myth' in the Barthesian sense. The Jewish situation is even more alive because so many people alive today went through it.

I'd be interested in the nature of a commemoration that you can propose that would be similar to therapy sessions.
 


Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Worldbystorm said:
No, but isn't this based very much on your reading of Freud. For example, someone might come at this from the opposite direction and say it was you who exhibited classic symptoms of obsessive neurosis, or even everyday 'normal' neuroses - after all denial is a knife that cuts both ways in any argument.
I would have thought that my contributions here approximated a hysterical organisation more than an obsessive one.


[quote:2n3wmcdr]Actually Freud didn't deal with 'peoples' per se. He dealt with groups - a rather different thing.
Have a look at "Moses and Monotheism". And is not a "people" or a "nation" a form of group?


But that doesn't answer the question of how does that 'trauma' hold up across 150 years? Do you consider that accents don't change under the influence of various factors. For example, probably like you I find it extremely annoying to hear some of the mangling of an Irish accent by DORT and other sub-accents, but then again I talk to people from around the country and regional accents remain strong. Again I wonder if you're not confusing class with national identity.
I often have wondered about your idea of class. The mores of a particular class in a particular country reflect something. In Ireland there is a tendency for families who have aquired some money, but maybe not quite so much education, to latch on to the mores of the English ruling class as a paradigm to be imitated. Usually this ends up with the kind of comic accents that Dean Swift noticed when he first came to Ireland. Again, this comes back to the mentally retarding effects of Irish people being wholly dependant on the English language.


Yes, I agree with you. Gaelscoileanna are a good thing, the use of Irish or even phrases is a good thing. However, it strikes me that at best we'll achieve a sort of bilingualism still pitched towards the anglophone.
Rome wasnt built in a day. Any sort of bilingualism would be a great improvement.


Again I agree with you. And I very much agreed with you re local placenames on a different thread. I don't know about the US, seeing as the vast majority of their population isn't even descended from the English I'm still fairly sure that any manifestations we see there are drawn from concepts of 'class' or 'sophistication'.
But why have they latched onto the mores of the English ruling class, as opposed to any other ruling class, as their model of "class" and "sophistication"? After all behaviour is entirely relative.


No, for an obvious reason. Even the Armenian genocide is within barely living memory. People alive today knew people who were hurt by it. But the hurt of the contemporary Armenians who didn't experience it is obviously going to be much lesser than those who went through it. Another generation or two and it's lost to 'myth' in the Barthesian sense. The Jewish situation is even more alive because so many people alive today went through it.
I think you are seriously underestimating the effects of events over long periods of time. And if you want to talk of the so called "famine" of the 1840s, thats a very short time. We live today with the effects of this event. '

I'd be interested in the nature of a commemoration that you can propose that would be similar to therapy sessions.
[/quote:2n3wmcdr]

What really happens in the clinic? A trauma modifies our thoughts and behaviour, but we dont know why, or how. We do not have words to remember the trauma with, or to explain the trauma in such a way that we can start to understand it and start to incorporate it into the person that we are. Looking at the reactions of many Irish people, its obvious that they are acutely aware of the trauma of their history, but they are afraid to really come to terms with it. They prefer to pretend that it dosnt matter or even that it never really happened. Why do they do this? Simply because their symbolic organisation cannot accomodate such a trauma. It must be rejected. Commemoration generates symbolisation. Symbolisation drains the poison from the trauma, and helps us identify with it.
 

Worldbystorm

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 6, 2005
Messages
321
Cael said:
I would have thought that my contributions here approximated a hysterical organisation more than an obsessive one.
:)


Have a look at "Moses and Monotheism". And is not a "people" or a "nation" a form of group?
No, I don't think so. Some would say that there is no such thing as a 'people', I don't go to that extreme, but I find the concept that a 'people' is easily definable and will react in a similar way to be unfeasible. You already note that the Irish 'nation' acted in different ways to the Famine, for those who weren't traumatised by the events, say those who profited, or were simply untouched by it why would they be 'hurt' even if we take your ideas as reasonable.

I often have wondered about your idea of class. The mores of a particular class in a particular country reflect something. In Ireland there is a tendency for families who have aquired some money, but maybe not quite so much education, to latch on to the mores of the English ruling class as a paradigm to be imitated. Usually this ends up with the kind of comic accents that Dean Swift noticed when he first came to Ireland. Again, this comes back to the mentally retarding effects of Irish people being wholly dependant on the English language.
Wonder no more. I tend to take a fairly classic Marxist approach to class, up until say Fordism/post-Fordism where the concept becomes fairly attenuated over time, particularly say from 1945 onwards.

I think the idea that English has somehow 'mentally retarded' Irish people is very very unlikely. How could you prove it? I also think your point regarding accents is curious. An accent is simply an accent, a product of many different forces. Are you sure you're not suffering from a form of cultural cringe or chauvinism?

Rome wasnt built in a day. Any sort of bilingualism would be a great improvement.
Absolutely. Completely agree. Other nations are built on it, Switzerland, Belgium to an extent, etc, etc.


But why have they latched onto the mores of the English ruling class, as opposed to any other ruling class, as their model of "class" and "sophistication"? After all behaviour is entirely relative.
I'd posit that your knowledge of other ruling classes is perhaps less extensive than you think. There is little enough distinction between elites within France or Germany or whereever and the UK. It's simply proximity to the UK which blots out the view beyond it. Actually I think you're hypersensitive to Englishness or rather to an idea or 'myth' of Englishness ( in the sense Barthes uses 'myth', although someone I'd strongly recommend you read is a guy called Donald Horne who was a leading Australian cultural theorist and had some interesting thoughts on 'myth' and culture some of which you might enjoy and even agree with)...


I think you are seriously underestimating the effects of events over long periods of time. And if you want to talk of the so called "famine" of the 1840s, thats a very short time. We live today with the effects of this event. '
But I'm still asking you for a specific mechanism as to how such events would 'hurt' a people and that 'hurt' would remain across generations of time. You haven't supplied one yet.


What really happens in the clinic? A trauma modifies our thoughts and behaviour, but we dont know why, or how. We do not have words to remember the trauma with, or to explain the trauma in such a way that we can start to understand it and start to incorporate it into the person that we are. Looking at the reactions of many Irish people, its obvious that they are acutely aware of the trauma of their history, but they are afraid to really come to terms with it. They prefer to pretend that it dosnt matter or even that it never really happened. Why do they do this? Simply because their symbolic organisation cannot accomodate such a trauma. It must be rejected. Commemoration generates symbolisation. Symbolisation drains the poison from the trauma, and helps us identify with it.
I genuinely don't understand how a single commemorative effect could ever be seen as a replacement for the sort of sequence of therapy sessions that occur in most Freudian therapy.

I don't know Cael. I sincerely take my hat off to you for attempting this synthesis of Freudian thought and nationalism, but it's so wispy, so tenuous. You haven't provided anything that I find convincing in terms of taking the particular i.e. Freudian theories (theories many would dispute as having any place in any serious discussion of the mind and it's makeup) and mapping it to the general - an entire people. You keep saying people are in trauma over Irish history. I see no evidence about it, and the evidence you proffer is so banal, accents, the names of housing estates etc...
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Im going to take a little time to answer most of the above because you raise some interesting points. But I will just quickly say that in the Freudian clinic such small incidents of the unconscious such as a pause or a slight hesitation or a slightly unusual pronunciation of a word or an unusual syntax are given the greatest attention and mined for meaning. Much more so that the overt or manifest speech of the subject. What we hear in the English language speech of the Irish would have to be considered gigantic sign posts by comparison.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
An article that you might find interesting WBS:

The Loss of Indigenous Languages - the Sociological Effects

The loss of indigenous language in Australia and in other countries is a dominant factor in the loss of culture. The loss of culture has had a dramatic effect on the lives of those to whom that culture belongs.

Origins

Culture and language is in most instances, much the same thing, with the loss of language, the loss of the culture and heritage follows. The loss of language has many harmful effects on the people to which the language belonged, a sense of disconnectedness is often reported, and this it has been said, is the cause of many of the problems dealt with by indigenous groups. To explain the issue of Loss of language and its impact on indigenous groups and their culture we will examine the Australian Aboriginal and the Torres Strait Islander (ATSI), and the fight for the integrity of their languages.

Before European settlement in 1788, perhaps the oldest culture in the world remained fundamentally untouched for tens of thousands of years. There were between six hundred and seven hundred distinct nations on the Australian continent, many of which had their own language, over two hundred languages. Today only half of this number has survived in any given form, with only twenty languages in common use, the largest community being the Yolugu tribe of north east Arnhem Land, with nearly six thousand speakers. (Schmidt, 1990, 145)

There are a number of reasons for the decline of native languages in Australia. With Australia being announced Terra nullius (Land without owners) the Aboriginals were referred to as squatters on their own tribal land. (Reynolds, 1989, 44) In many cases where land was to be developed for farming, the Aboriginals tribe whose land it was, were moved off the land and sent to settlements. For a culture so intertwined with the land they occupied, this must have a detrimental effect. Firstly their lore of the land, passed down verbally from each generation would no longer be relevant on the settlement. 'A language long associated with the culture is best able to most exactly, most richly, with appropriate over-tones, [relay] the concerns, artefacts, values and interests of that culture.' (Fishmam, 1996) Much of the cultural heritage is lost in this manner. Words only used for a certain plant or stream of significance are no longer in everyday use, so are lost to the younger generation.

Secondly there was the loss of language through the European’s policy of assimilation. The Aborigines Protection Board (“the Protection Board”) was established in 1883. The aims of the Board in the late 1800s and early 1900s were to concentrate Aborigines on reserves, enforce dependency through a ration system, destroy the culture and absorb those other than “full-bloods” into white Australian society. The removal of Aboriginal children from their families and their subsequent placement in “training homes” and other “educational” institutions was also an integral part of the Board’s practice. At these homes Aboriginal girls were trained as domestic servants, and Aboriginal boys were trained to be rural workers. The children were forbidden to use their own language and most were forbidden to see their parents, even if they lived on the same mission station. (Rowena, 1964, 87) Many never saw their parents again. Sally Morgan says, from her own experience, 'the children were taught to be ashamed of their Aboriginality, and pretended all their lives that they were White. Some never knew they were Aboriginal.' (Rowena, 1964, 88) The loss of language, culture and identity, has had a dramatic effect on the lives of the Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander.

Effects

'While the assimilationist approach that Aboriginal people be diluted into a larger culture had devastating effects, the welfare emphasis, which sought to improve hygiene and material conditions for Aboriginal people--had some success… However, service providers were totally insensitive to Aboriginal cultural prerequisites, believing that such attitudes had no place in a modern family.' (The Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody National Report, 1992)

The report lists this cultural attack as one the reasons for the high crime rate and domestic abuse accruing within Aboriginal communities around Australia. However the loss of language also has its effect on the individual. The Office for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Health (OATSIH), a government run organisation, states that the suicide rates for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders are proportionally high. In Western Australian they are double the rate of non-ATSI suicides. (Youth Suicide Advisory Commitee, 1998)

Aboriginal people are hugely over represented in Australian prison populations. Nationally Aboriginal people constitute less than 1% of the Australian population; however Aboriginal people constitute 19% of the total adult prison population, and approximately 40% of the juveniles in detention.” And, 'Between 1988 and 1998 the number of Aboriginal prisoners increased by 107% nationally. Aboriginal prison populations have grown faster than non Aboriginal prison populations in all Australian States and Territories.' (Dubes, 2002)

According to the report, this alarming trend is partly caused by the sense of alienation felt by Aboriginal and the Torres Strait Islanders, saying that their disconnection from traditional culture, and the discrimination by the mainstream society, and the resentment that this creates, has left the ATSI without guidance.

Iris Lovett-Gardiner’s perspective, being born on the Aboriginal mission at Lake Conder, is that 'the local history for Aboriginal people is one of dispossession. White people rounded up local Aboriginal people and put them on a mission at Lake Conder. Children on the mission lived in dormitory conditions and not with their families. This has resulted in the total loss of our language and the loss, by most of those in our community, of a sense of belonging to a family.' (Lovett-Gardiner, 2001)

There are a small number of foundations working to improve the state of native language loss within Australia such as: Regional Aboriginal Language Centres (RALCs) established in Western Australia and the Northern Territory in the 1980s as Indigenous-controlled bodies. They were charged with assisting in the running of local community language programs in their regions, including language documentation, education and training, materials and multimedia production, and interpreting/translation. However, it was not until the 1990’s that these centres delivered any type of successful language service. (McConvell and Thieberger, 2001)

Many people are calling for a more proactive approach. The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) and the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation put together the report 'Towards Social Justice Compilation Report Of Consultations' ATSIC and the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation consulted with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples on matters that those communities or organisations which included social justice measures for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. This is a combined response from both the government and the ATSI and the issue of Language was covered in some detail. The report states that, 'Cultural studies, histories, cultures and languages, should be compulsorily introduced into the curriculum of all education institutions throughout Australia' including, 'The right to be educated in our own languages and measures to promote language maintenance,' and 'Equal status should be given to Aboriginal dialects and the English language within the education system' (ATSIC and the Council for Aboriginal Reconciliation, 1994)

New Zealand - Canada

The issue of language loss is world wide, one country, Australia’s neighbour New Zealand has struggled with the loss of the Maori native tongue for the past two decades. New Zealand however, has succeeded where Australia has failed. In 1980, The Maori people of New Zealand faced much the same problem as the Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders; they called a large tribal Hui, a meeting, that year to determine the future of the language. A program called Te Kohanga Reo, The Language Nest, was developed. 'The program consisted of a total school immersion for young children in the Maori language, values, and ways of life.' (Alison Yaunches, 2000) The technique used by the Te Kohanga Reo centres has attracted the attention of many other countries as the word of the programs success spreads, one such group being the Cochiti Pueblo of New Mexico.

European settlement of New Zealand was a unique enterprise, differing much from Australia’s colonisation. Where Australia was declared Terra Nullius, New Zealand was recognised as being owned, and the Europeans settled the land through negotiations rather than force. The Treaty of Waitangi, signed on 6 February 1840 between the English Captain William Hobson and approximately 45 Maori chiefs, established British sovereignty over the islands, whilst protecting Maori rights to their lands and natural resources. In the majority, the Europeans maintained the peace with the Maori to whom the land belonged. Perhaps this is one of the reasons the Maori language has survived settlement more efficiently than many Aboriginal languages. However largely, this survival is attributed to the fact that Te Reo Mäori was the national language; varying little from tribe to tribe. (Dennis and Leonard, 2000)

Much like Australia, the First Peoples of America are struggling to save their languages, with many organisations such as Native Languages of the Americas: Preserving and promoting American Indian languages, the (NLA). On the American continent the history of genocide and assimilation of the Aboriginal also has its similarities with Australia in that Canada like Australia implemented boarding schools in an effort to socialise the Aboriginal. In the damning report, Hidden From History: The Canadian Holocaust, survivors of the boarding schools and their families, from both Canada and the US are now drafting a resolution they aim to have introduced in Congress that would demand compensation for the roughly 100,000 native children taken from their homes in the 18th and 19th centuries with the goal of assimilating them into white society, America’s stolen generation. “Activists argue that Washington is liable under international law for any continuing effects of that system, including the loss of aboriginal languages and the widespread violence in many native communities.” (Annett, 1998)

There are three groups within Canada that comprise the Canadian Aboriginal, the First Nations (often referred to as "Indians"), the Inuit (northern people formerly referred to as "eskimoes"), and Métis (people of mixed French and Indian blood who originally settled in western Canada). The issue of loss of cultural heritage and language has affected them all.

'The policy of forced assimilation has devastated Aboriginal people. Its legacy is loss of language and destruction of culture, chronic addictions, community violence, suicide, broken families, mistrust of leadership and authority, and shame. In the past decade, many residential school survivors have also come forward with stories of physical and sexual abuse suffered while attending residential school.' (DeGagné, 2000)

In response to outcries from the Aboriginal community in Canada, the government issued a “Statement of Reconciliation." This statement was contained within a document entitled Gathering Strength-Canada's Aboriginal Action Plan. The document acknowledged the states role in the implementation and running of these schools, and acknowledged the damage they have caused to Aboriginal culture. The Aboriginal Healing Foundation (AHF) was created and the Government committed $350-million in funding. The Aboriginal response to the statement varied. Some thought the statement was a step forward in Aboriginal reconciliation, while others interpreted the statement as a means of minimising lawsuits. Though, despite the differing opinions the statement was widely interpreted as an apology.

Programs have been initiated in Canada in a measure to maintain Aboriginal language, these are government funded, and run by elders in the community. One such organisation is the Yukon Native Language Centre. Programs include adult education and diplomas in Native studies, and school based learning. Nearly all Yukon communities have school-based Native Language programs. These are offered to both non-native and native students, with the aim of exposing the students to the local language and to encourage a positive attitude toward it.

Conclusion

The loss of language long associated with a culture, cannot be taken and replaced without harmful affects. The Australian Aboriginal and the Torres Strait Islander people have lost a tremendous amount of distinct, irretrievable culture, with only four per cent of their languages remaining strong today. The loss of Language is felt broadly through the communities of those affected. Through the loss of language, and culture, which are synonymous, a sense of alienations, hostility and disregard has emerged, affecting all manner of life throughout Australia. The struggle for language is common throughout the world. Some languages have been saved, most are still in danger, like many of the languages of the Americas, and others have died out entirely. New Zealand is a beacon of light for those who struggle; their success has inspired others to carry on the fight to save their cultural heritage.

Full text:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/ww2/A10936668
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Another interesting article. It doesnt really get to grips, from a psychological point of view, with the effect of the loss of the native signifier and the adoption of an alien signifier, but it makes some interesting points:


COLONIAL LANGUAGE POLICIES AND THEIR EFFECTS

Miyawaki Hiroyuki
Miyagi Gakuin University
Sendai-Japan
miyawaki@mgu.ac.jp




1. Colonialism and language ecology


Colonialism destabilized fragments of language ecology producing complexities such as pidgin/creole, bilingualism, language shifts, language loss etc. Sociolinguistics (e.g. R. Wardhaugh: 1987, R. Phillipson: 1992) has clarified that these phenomena are produced by language contact between two or more distinctive languages. It should be noted that in many cases the language contact take place in such political situations as imperialism, colonialism, annexation, occupation etc when the language of the ruled meets that of the ruler. And even after these political forms end of themselves, their effects might persist remarkably among the speakers of the dominated and sometimes even of the dominant languages. Sociolinguistics has not opened much discussion of the correlation between the political causes and the linguistic effects so far, while such discussion is essential for clarifying the overall paradigm of the covert phases of language ecology.


This paper intends to examine language phenomena produced by language treatment under Japanese colonial and occupational rule in Asia during the first half of the previous century and also to tentatively examine the correlation between political causes/factors (such as imperialism/ colonialism, integration etc.), language treatment/phenomena (such as language diffusion, pidginization/creolization and language shift/loss etc.) and social, cultural and psychological phenomena (such as cultural friction, identity loss etc.).

The data for this examination were collected by the author's field work in the former colonies and occupied areas: Malaysia, Singapore, Myanmar, China, Korea, the South Seas Islands which now constitute Micronesia. The research was conducted by interviewing local people over 65 who once learned Japanese during the Japanese rule.

2. Colonial education and language policies

Since the late 1890s Japan colonized neighboring countries in Asia and continued imposing the Japanese language, social systems, social practices and values on the colonized natives until Japan was defeated in WW II, 1945.

The Japanese language has ceased to exist as a lingua franca in Asia for more than half a century, but little has been researched up to the present on the historical facts of the imposed Japanese teaching and its effects on the local population. It is significant, therefore, to see what language policies under what educational goals were implemented by the Japanese.

First, let us see the educational regulations, which illustrate the treatment of the local languages and the status of Japanese in each territory.

Taiwan (1895-1945)

In 1895 Taiwan came under Japanese rule after the Sino-Japan War of 1894-95. The Japanese Government-General in Taiwan instituted the Common School Regulations in 1898, stating that the fundamental objectives of common school education be the provision of moral education and practical skills to Taiwanese children, thereby cultivating in them attitudes of Japanese nationalism and also leading them to be well versed in 'Kokugo' [the national language i.e. Japanese] (Article 1).

The Common School Regulations were revised several times thereafter. More drastic revisions such as the abolition of the native language (Chinese) teaching and the integration of the educational system and curriculum with those of homeland Japan were made in 1937 and in 1942 respectively.

Other systems of promoting assimilation were reinforced as well in the late 1930s when Japan started the full scale war in China: the changing of personal names into Japanese ones, the award-winning system of 'Kokugo joyo-katei' (model families of ordinary Japanese using), pupils' deep bowing to the Japanese Imperial Palace at the morning assembly (facing the north of Taiwan), pupils' reciting of 'Kyoiku Chokugo' [the Imperial Rescript on Education], courteous visits to Shinto shrines and Japanese evening classes for adults etc.

Korea (1910-1945)

Japan annexed Korea in 1910. In the following year the Korea Education Prescript was legislated by the Japanese Government-General in Korea, pursuing the same achievement of the Japanese 'Kyoiku Chokugo' [the Imperial Rescript on Education].

It oriented moral education and Japanese teaching, as in Taiwanese education, stating that educational practice base its fundamental ideas on the Imperial Rescript on Education and teach Koreans to be pious imperial nationals (Article 2).

In Article 5, it stated that normal education should place its goal on providing children with general knowledge and skills, thereby cultivating in them attitudes of Japanese nationalism and diffusing the national language.

Revision was also made several times. The third revision in 1938 abolished de facto Korean language teaching, leaving it voluntary and stressed the through-going inculcation of Japanization in the curriculum contents. The Primary School Regulations which was revised in the same year, stated that the medium of instruction be 'Kokugo' (Article 16-8).

Other imperialist assimilation systems were employed as well. In addition to the practices in Taiwan, Korean pupils were required to give the choral reciting of 'The oaths of imperial subjects' at the morning assembly, identifying themselves as loyal subjects of the Japanese Emperor.

Micronesia (1914-1945)

In 1914 when Japan joined WW I, the Japanese Navy occupied the South Seas Islands, or Micronesia, which had been under German rule. In 1915 the Japanese navy initiated teaching of the Japanese language and songs to the island children. The Primary School Regulations of the South Seas Islands in 1914, stressed the teaching of 'Kokugo' and moral education as its goals: The primary school should have as its goal, providing island children with moral education, teaching of the national language, general knowledge and skills essential to their daily life, ... (and) indoctrinating them with filial piety and obedience to authority (Article 1).

The Directions for Primary School Teachers in 1916 more clearly described the educational goals for islanders:

Now that the South Seas Islands are under the rule of the Japanese Empire, it is certainly the mission of the Japanese Empire that the Empire should nurture the islanders and assimilate them. Education is the essential means of assimilation. Assimilation, whether it will be successful or not, solely depends on education, and education, whether it will be successful or not, similarly depends on teachers. Teachers should feel obliged to take island children as His Majesty's children and nurture them with benevolence.

The distinctive features of the mandated South Seas Islands education was that the educational system was limited to 3 years at common schools and 2 more years at a vocational training school for only a limited number of promising pupils.

Manchoukuo (1932-1945)

In 1932, Japan established a puppet state called 'Manchoukuo' in the northeast of China. It aimed for a multinational state of five major different peoples: Manchurians, Chinese, Mongolians, Koreans and Japanese. They were to cooperate in order to build an ideal state 'Odo Rakudo' [a Realm of Peace and Prosperity].

'Gakusei Yoko' [The School System Outline] legislated in 1937, stated that:

The Japanese language should be given priority in respective school systems over any other state language, considering the spirit of Japan-Manchoukuo: one virtue and one mind. The state languages should be Japanese, Manchu (Chinese) and Mongolian, with Japanese as a more important common language than the others.

The Educational Department of Manchoukuo proclaimed to teaching staff the 'Thorough Diffusion of Japanese in the School Education' in 1937, as follows:

(1) Japanese language teachers should not treat Japanese teaching just like language instruction, but should let pupils realize Japanese spirit and Japanese customs and manners, and therefore endeavor through Japanese to enlighten them with the true meaning of one virtue and one mind in the light of Japan-Manchoukuo relationships,

(2) Japanese teachers should endeavor to let Chinese teaching staff and students realize the significance of the thorough diffusion of Japanese,

(3) Chinese teachers should learn Japanese,

(4) Chinese teaching staff and students should carry on the use of Japanese at home, as well as at school etc.

Occupied areas in China (1937-45)

In other parts of China such as Beijing, Tianjin, Jinan, Nanjing, Shanghai, where pro-Japanese puppet regimes such as the Societies for Maintenance of the Public Peace or the Hsinminhui Societies (a kind of Concordia Association) were established after Japanese invasion, Japanese teaching was introduced as part of cultural propaganda in China. The educational goals were instituted to counter anti-Japanese, pro-communist ideology and unify the diverse national groups in Asia and exalt a Japanese idea of moral justice in East Asia.

In the late 1930s a number of Japanese language schools were founded in the above-mentioned cities to produce civil servants (clerks, diplomats, policemen and school teachers) with Japanese competence who would cooperate with the Japanese administration for the establishment of 'Daitoa' [the Greater East Asia]. Japanese teaching at primary, secondary and tertiary schools was also initiated in the same period, giving 2-3, or 5-6 class hours per week depending on regional and school situations. The class hours devoted to teaching Japanese exceeded those of the local language

Southeast Asia (1942-1945)

During the Pacific War (8 December 1941-15 August 1945) Japanese forces carried out military administration in the occupied areas such as the Philippines, Malaya/Sumatra/Singapore, Indonesia and Burma. In these areas, more abrupt measures were taken. Once an area came under Japanese rule, Japanese military administration promulgated its educational principles that referred to language status and application.

The major lines related with language/culture matters were:

(1) To diffuse Japanese, gradually limit the use of European languages and eventually abolish them,

(2) The official language should be Japanese or a major local language, but for the time being European languages be allowed to be used,

(3) The medium of instruction should be Japanese,

(4) To stamp out European/American thoughts, and establish an Oriental-minded culture,

(5) To demonstrate to the Southern peoples the Japanese imperial spirit of 'Hakko ichiu '[the eight corners of the world under one roof] and unify other Asian cultures into Japanese culture,

After the educational principles were declared, the military administration founded Japanese language schools to produce Japanese-speaking interpreters, civil servants, engineers, businessmen and school teachers who would cooperate with Japanese military administrations. The retrained teachers taught simple Japanese to their children at their original schools. The problems that could be identified as characteristic, however, were that;

-Japanese learning above all accounted for the greater part of the curriculum,

-few Japanese language teachers were well-trained,

-it was too late for Japanese trained teachers to arrive from Japan, so some Japanese soldiers at the front who had teaching experience back in Japan, were engaged,

-Japanese supervisors who could help in-service local teachers improve their teaching skill were too few in number to meet the needs,

-the Japanese textbooks were not compiled in time for the reopening of the schools, so the textbooks were locally made,

-the schools hours arranged were too short (usually 2-3 hours daily) compared with 5-6 in other areas like Taiwan and Korea,

-the education was defective in that it provided only simple language skills, Japanese songs and exercises, but not native language, science, or locally-based social studies/history were provided,

-education including Japanese teaching was made use of as a propaganda machine to justify Japan's expansive imperialism,

-the contents of education were strongly influenced by Japanese political ideology, promoting 'Daitoa kyoeiken', establishing the new order in Asia with Japan as the leader.

3. Fieldwork data

The author conducted fieldwork in Malaysia, Singapore, China, Korea, Micronesia, Myanmar (Burma), and interviewed more than 100 former students who learned Japanese under Japanese rule. The interview was conducted basically in Japanese to obtain their language competence data. Surprisingly the former students maintained Japanese to a communicable degree in spite of their short period of learning. The findings from the fieldwork are that:

Native language use (in Taiwan, Korea, Manchoukuo) was strictly forbidden in the school, and once witnessed speaking the native language, punishment was given

[Taiwan: In the 2nd term of the First Grade we came to speak in broken Japanese. There were occasions that we were whipped if we spoke Taiwanese in the 3rd or 4th Grade.
Korea: If anyone used Korean at school, he/she was punished; he/she was forced to wear a 'penalty plate' on the neck until he/she caught someone else using Korean. ]

-Natives followed the Japanese manners and practices

[Micronesia: Every morning we assembled on the playground. And facing north to Japan, we made a courteous bow to the Japanese Emperor 'Ten'no'. At school we never spoke our language Marshallese, we spoke only the Japanese language. If we spoke Marshallese at school, the teacher beat us. At the morning assembly we sang 'Kimigayo' and raised 'Hinomaru' the Japanese national flag, and then cited the school rules. We were indoctrinated that we were Emperor's subjects. ]

-Partly maintaining Japanese in the specific situations such as secret talk between husband and wife

[Micronesia: My wife and I use Japanese only when we have something that we don't want to be understood by our children, when we talk in secret, when we argue and yell at each other before our children]

-Grammatical interference from English usage 'some (a certain)' into Japanese 'aru', when that usage usually doesn't occur among native speakers of Japanese,

[Micronesia: 'Aru' onna no ko ga, ano-tottemo omoshiroi yome de ne. ('Some' girl, well, she was a very funny bride.)] (some = a certain, singular)

-Borrowings in both Japanese and Chinese emerged in the northeast of China

[Manchoukuo: We had Japanese borrowings in Chinese and Chinese borrowings in Japanese. That created 'Kyowa-go' [a pidgin language]. Japanese grammar was also taken into Chinese and we were confused

-Linguistic, cultural, psychological effects of Japanese on natives after the liberation of 1945; language shift/loss, identity loss

[Korea: I continued using Japanese for two or three years after the liberation of 1945, since I was completely accustomed to speaking Japanese and couldn't speak Korean well]

-English use was forbidden and native languages were admitted in former British colonies.

[Singapore: English was prohibited, but we could use our local languages,
Malay, Tamil or Chinese]

-Vernacularization of Japanese creole

[Micronesia: bento [lunch], meshi [(boiled) rice], sushi [sushi], hashi [chopsticks], sukiyaki [sukiyaki], daikon [radish], denki [electric light], tenjo [ceiling], yuka [floor], zori [sandals], chirishi [tissue], shinbun [newspaper], yakan [kettle], undokai [sports day/meet], yakyu [baseball], marason [marathon], sumo [sumo wrestling], tunahiki [tug of war] etc.

4. Correlation of politics and language

From the above discussion it is clear that colonialism as one of the political factors produced a diverse range of effects on language management/treatment, language phenomena and social, cultural, psychological phenomena.

The historical background of Japanese colonialism for this discussion may be briefly summarized as follows: Japan colonized its neighboring countries/areas beginning from the late 1890s, by winning at the Japan-Sino War (1894-95), the Japan-Russia War (1904-05), the WWI (1914-18), and invading China (1931) and the Southeast Asia (1941). Japanese Governments there managed and treated the languages of the colonized/occupied areas with language legislation, giving Japanese the top status (as an official/state language) that formed language stratification, and stamped out the local languages (Taiwanese, Korean, island languages in Micronesia), which lead to linguicism. If they spoke their own languages, they suffered language punishment. They ware deprived of their own language use at school. That sort of inhumane system may be termed language oppression. The languages of the ruled came to be less used, which led to language decline.

The above harsh system of language treatment produced diverse linguistic phenomena. Diglossia (Japanese-High, native languages-Low) and pidgin Japanese emerged as is exemplified in the cases of the northeast of China and Micronesia, and partly developed to creole. Japanese borrowings are vernacularized, and Tunahiki (tug of war) and Sumo are popular games at Undokai (sports meet) in Micronesia.

From the author's fieldwork, some of the local people who had experienced Japanese colonial teaching were able to code-switch, since they are still bilinguals.

Social/cultural/psychological phenomena are also linked with colonialism. The pre-war and wartime Japan promoted imperialistic world-view (nationalism) and infused it into its colonized/occupied population. The native people there were indoctrinated with Japanese Ten'no (Emperor)-centered world-view. Loyalty to Japan and its Ten'no was enforced upon them (some of the old Micronesian islanders still adore the former Japanese Emperor). The native people suffered racial discrimination and prejudice; they were labeled as second/third class subjects even though they acquired good Japanese competence, and some of those people felt ashamed of identifying themselves; they lost their ethnic identity.

The correlation of these factors and effects above may be illustrated as follows (see the appendix):

The Japanese colonialism/occupation as a political factor (in the Sector I of the Correlation paradigm) managed the languages of the ruler and the ruled by legislating the status of them (in Sector II) with Japanese a high status and the ruled languages a low status. Thus the language stratification was induced, resulting in such treatments as oppression, deprivation, punishment, linguicism and language decline/genocide in the Sector II. These treatments may be categorized as 'negative' phases, while legislation may be categorized as 'neutral' or 'positive' depending on political factors.

From the above treatments a large variety of language phenomena such as pidginization/creolization, borrowing, vernacularization, diglossia in the 'negative' phase, and code switch, bilingualism, interference etc. in the 'neutral' developed as is in the Sector III.

Colonialism, on the other hand, affected the society, culture and psychology of the ruled, and produced a variety of social, cultural and psychological phenomena such as discrimination/prejudice, assimilation, identity loss etc. in the 'negative' phase as is in the Sector IV.

Full text
http://www.linguapax.org/congres/taller ... awaki.html
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
An address by a New Zealand member of parliament, and cabinet minister, which says pretty much everything I said - six years ago:


29 /8 /2000

Hon Tariana Turia

Speech to New Zealand Psychological Society Conference, Waikato University
Tena tatau e hui nei i tenei ra. Tena koutou nga rangatira o Waikato. Nga mihi ki a koutou a ki Te Ata-i- rangikaahu hoki. Tena tatau katoa.

Thank you for inviting me to speak at this conference. Over the last week or so, such has been the activity over what I have been purported to have said or done, I have at times questioned the nature of truth.

I also questioned hearing, listening and memory.

Indeed I was tempted to seek wise counsel and I did think of this gathering this week and the thought did enter my head, that a psychologist just might come in handy.

I dismissed the thought very quickly!

I realised that the best counsellors for me are the very supportive whanau I am fortunate to have.

A whanau, who in times when my spirit needs nurturing I can always turn to. I am also always able to tap the resource of the memories and guidance of those who have passed on, to give me solace and to uplift me.

It is this whanau of whom I am a member which nurtures and sustains me.

It is this whanau which is also a part of the iwi of Whanganui, Ngati Apa, Nga Rauru and Tuwharetoa who are responsible for my identity, responsible for the security that I have in knowing who I am.

What my whanau are not able to provide I will seek in the hapu and iwi. I have numerous choices.

We all know the social structures of whanau, hapu and iwi are responsible for both cultural reproduction and identity.

All of you here know these same social structures have demonstrated amazing resilience as sites of resistance to colonisation, but, which as you also know, have been seriously weakened.

Given what I have just said you just might have realised that what I wish to address with you today is the phenomenon of colonisation and some thoughts on what the implications may be for psychology.

I know Tariana Turia and "colonisation" always attracts attention.

I seek not personal attention. I just want us to consider our history as a country and consider how this history has affected the indigenous people, how this history has impacted on Maori whanau, hapu and iwi.

I really do believe that mature, intelligent New Zealanders of all races are capable of the analysis of the trauma of one group of people suffering from the behaviour of another.

I can see the connections between 'home invasions' which concern many of us, to the invasion of the 'home lands' of indigenous people by a people from another land.

What I have difficulty in reconciling is how 'home invasions' emits such outpourings of concern for the victims and an intense despising of the invaders while the invasion of the 'home lands' of Maori does not engender the same level of emotion and concern for the Maori victims.

I wonder why that is?

A double standard seems to be working here, you as psychologists I am confident will be able to identify and label the double standard.

With personal identity inextricably tied to whanau, hapu and iwi identity, indigenous people still have to counter the problems of the conspiracy of alienation, assimilation and deculturation launched against them well over a century ago.

I have been accused in Parliament in the past week of indulging in "sociological clap trap" when linking colonisation to family violence.

I can now imagine after this speech that I will be accused of indulging in 'psychological clap trap'.

I may look to you to defend me against such scurrilous attacks. I suppose I should be grateful the house is not sitting.

What I need to say however that as psychologists you frequently have as your clients, Maori people.

The challenge I put to you is - Do you seriously believe that you, with the training that you get, are able to nurture the Maori psyche, are you able to see in to the soul of the people and attend to the wounded spirit?

Do you consider for example the effects of the trauma of colonisation? I know that psychology has accepted the relevance of PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder)

I understand that much of the research done in this area has focussed on the trauma suffered by the Jewish survivors of the holocaust of World War Two. I also understand the same has been done with the Vietnam veterans.

What seems to not have received similar attention is the holocaust suffered by indigenous people including Maori as a result of colonial contact and behaviour.

The Waitangi Tribunal made such a reference in its Taranaki Report of 1996 and I recollect what appeared to be a "but our holocaust was worse than your holocaust" debate. A debate I must add, I do not wish to enter.

Psychologists, Emeritus Professor James and Professor Jane Ritchie likewise link colonisation with violence.

Native American Psychologist Eduardo Duran suggests in referring to Native Americans that the colonial oppression suffered by indigenous people inevitably wounds the soul.

He also says that for any effective therapy to take place the historical context of generations of oppression since colonial contact needs to be articulated, acknowledged and understood.

Professor Mason Durie identifies the onset of colonisation and the subsequent alienation and theft of the land as the beginning of Maori health issues that manifest themselves today. Issues, that have as a result of inter-generational systemic abuse, become culturally endemic.

Since first colonial contact, much effort has been invested in attempts at individualising Maori with the introduction of numerous assimilationist policies and laws to alienate Maori from their social structures which were linked to the guardianship and occupation of land.

A consequence of colonial oppression has been the internalisation by Maori of the images the oppressor has of them. It is for that reason that I found the negative portrayal of Maori whanau last week to be both spiritually and psychologically damaging.

I know the psychological consequences of the internalisation of negative images is for people to take for themselves the illusion of the oppressors' power while they are in a situation of helplessness and despair, a despair leading to self-hatred and for many, suicide.

The externalisation of the self-hatred on the other hand, is seen with the number of Maori who are convicted of crimes of violence and the very high number of Maori women and children who are the victims of violence.

The film 'Once Were Warriors' and the Keri Hulme novel, 'The Bone People' bring home all too graphically the extreme levels of violence which for many, is seen as culturally endemic behaviour, behaviour which they and the wider society in which they live, see as 'normal'.

The phenomenon of Post Colonial Traumatic Stress Disorder and its effects it appears are now culturally integrated in to the psyche and soul of Maori. It never used to be there. Indeed as Professor Anne Salmond has found, children were indulged and records of early contact show that violence towards children was uncommon. More uncommon than it was in Europe at the same period. A golden age for Maori children it would seem.

Maori tribal commentators and Treaty negotiators like Dr Hirini Mead of Te Runanga O Ngati Awa have alluded to the cumulative generational effects of trauma or as he put it 'damage' which has been passed down from the period of the Land Wars to current generations.

A question Dr Mead has posed was related to the amount of compensation required to repair the intergenerational damage to the people. Damage, the genesis of which resides in the nineteenth century.

The holocaust suffered by many Maori tribes during the Land Wars needs to be acknowledged. Only then will the healing for Maori occur.

Indeed some of the events surrounding Treaty of Waitangi land settlements have resulted in healing for the whanau of ancestors murdered by the State in State institutions.

The bones of these ancestors have been taken from the gaols and returned to their tribal homes. The return of these physical and spiritual ancestral remains have resulted in the descendants, who generations before, left their tribal lands in shame, also returning 'home'. For these families, the healing can now begin.

For Maori, indeed for all indigenous people the issue is the identification of the trauma, as Post Colonial Traumatic Stress Disorder in order to site the issue in its proper historical, political and economic context.

This would also encourage considering the continuing oppressive effects of colonisation and the various forms it has taken as Native American academic Ward Churchill says, "since predator came".

The signs and symptoms of Post Colonial Traumatic Stress Disorder (PCTSD) with Maori, needs analysis and examination.

My challenge would be for the few Maori psychologists amongst you, to lead the discourse on that analysis.


Following are some indicators of the results of post colonial trauma.

· Have a poor self-image.
· Have a tendency to self belittle.
· Tribe deprived of land by government dishonesty and theft.
· Parents/grandparents beaten for speaking their mother tongue.
· Members unable to identify with tribe.
· Identity now based on where they live (urban) and not on genealogy and ancestry.
· Fearful of imprisonment unless cousins are also incarcerated.
· Subjected to personal, institutional and cultural racism.
· Beat up spouse, children and siblings.

While much of my address to you today has focussed on the effects of colonisation and has considered that macro position, at a local and personal level I would like you to also consider the following.

Does your training and education address issues like the nature of the Maori kai tiaki, the spiritual guardian all Maori have? What if I told you I have been visited a number of times by my kai tiaki and had carried out a conversation? What if I said to you that my kai tiaki had cautioned me about a particular action?

What for example is mate Maori? (Maori sickness)
What is makutu?
What is the nature of the rau kotahi; the multiple self?

Finally in terms of our world-views, what is the difference between you saying "I think, therefore I am" and us saying "We are".

Kia ora tatau.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
Worldbystorm said:
Cael said:
I would have thought that my contributions here approximated a hysterical organisation more than an obsessive one.
:)


Have a look at "Moses and Monotheism". And is not a "people" or a "nation" a form of group?
No, I don't think so. Some would say that there is no such thing as a 'people', I don't go to that extreme, but I find the concept that a 'people' is easily definable and will react in a similar way to be unfeasible. You already note that the Irish 'nation' acted in different ways to the Famine, for those who weren't traumatised by the events, say those who profited, or were simply untouched by it why would they be 'hurt' even if we take your ideas as reasonable.

[quote:2bndwthy]I often have wondered about your idea of class. The mores of a particular class in a particular country reflect something. In Ireland there is a tendency for families who have aquired some money, but maybe not quite so much education, to latch on to the mores of the English ruling class as a paradigm to be imitated. Usually this ends up with the kind of comic accents that Dean Swift noticed when he first came to Ireland. Again, this comes back to the mentally retarding effects of Irish people being wholly dependant on the English language.
Wonder no more. I tend to take a fairly classic Marxist approach to class, up until say Fordism/post-Fordism where the concept becomes fairly attenuated over time, particularly say from 1945 onwards.

I think the idea that English has somehow 'mentally retarded' Irish people is very very unlikely. How could you prove it? I also think your point regarding accents is curious. An accent is simply an accent, a product of many different forces. Are you sure you're not suffering from a form of cultural cringe or chauvinism?

Rome wasnt built in a day. Any sort of bilingualism would be a great improvement.
Absolutely. Completely agree. Other nations are built on it, Switzerland, Belgium to an extent, etc, etc.


But why have they latched onto the mores of the English ruling class, as opposed to any other ruling class, as their model of "class" and "sophistication"? After all behaviour is entirely relative.
I'd posit that your knowledge of other ruling classes is perhaps less extensive than you think. There is little enough distinction between elites within France or Germany or whereever and the UK. It's simply proximity to the UK which blots out the view beyond it. Actually I think you're hypersensitive to Englishness or rather to an idea or 'myth' of Englishness ( in the sense Barthes uses 'myth', although someone I'd strongly recommend you read is a guy called Donald Horne who was a leading Australian cultural theorist and had some interesting thoughts on 'myth' and culture some of which you might enjoy and even agree with)...


I think you are seriously underestimating the effects of events over long periods of time. And if you want to talk of the so called "famine" of the 1840s, thats a very short time. We live today with the effects of this event. '
But I'm still asking you for a specific mechanism as to how such events would 'hurt' a people and that 'hurt' would remain across generations of time. You haven't supplied one yet.


What really happens in the clinic? A trauma modifies our thoughts and behaviour, but we dont know why, or how. We do not have words to remember the trauma with, or to explain the trauma in such a way that we can start to understand it and start to incorporate it into the person that we are. Looking at the reactions of many Irish people, its obvious that they are acutely aware of the trauma of their history, but they are afraid to really come to terms with it. They prefer to pretend that it dosnt matter or even that it never really happened. Why do they do this? Simply because their symbolic organisation cannot accomodate such a trauma. It must be rejected. Commemoration generates symbolisation. Symbolisation drains the poison from the trauma, and helps us identify with it.
I genuinely don't understand how a single commemorative effect could ever be seen as a replacement for the sort of sequence of therapy sessions that occur in most Freudian therapy.

I don't know Cael. I sincerely take my hat off to you for attempting this synthesis of Freudian thought and nationalism, but it's so wispy, so tenuous. You haven't provided anything that I find convincing in terms of taking the particular i.e. Freudian theories (theories many would dispute as having any place in any serious discussion of the mind and it's makeup) and mapping it to the general - an entire people. You keep saying people are in trauma over Irish history. I see no evidence about it, and the evidence you proffer is so banal, accents, the names of housing estates etc...[/quote:2bndwthy]

WBS, I have given a couple of articles above which make some attempt to address the concerns that I have raised. Unfortunately, I could not find any work by Irish acedemics on the internet on the subject. But you will, of course, admit that there is nothing new in my approach or ideas.

You make the point that it was really only the Irish speaking Gael that were directly effected by the "famines". Those "grabbers" who profited by them were, you say, not adversely effected. I think some serious work needs to be done on this, but my instinct is that you are not entirely correct. Certainly, the families of grabbers were not forgotten in rural areas for several generations. Needless to say, neither the Catholic or Protestant churchs came out of it very well. The question of survivor guilt has also been raised in relation to Ireland.

As for the idea of some kind of group therepy in the form of commoration not being a substitute for individual sessions in the clinic, you are not talking about the same thing. Attacks on groups, would, I would think, best be delt with in relation to the whole target group. To a great extent it is the signifier, or language of the target group that has been traumatised and distorted. From the signifier groups take their identity and self image. ( Im not talking about Irish or English, but language in general)

To a certain extent, WBS, Im very surprised that you, as a professional historian, seem unaware of issues and debates regarding the trauma caused by colonialism.
 

bogman

Member
Joined
Oct 5, 2009
Messages
19
Hey, let's rename 'George Best City Airport' as 'Gordon Banks City Airport'. Why not? To the Irish mind, English names = better.

Driving through a small mainly-Nationalist village in Co. Tyrone recently (Ballygawley, Mickey Harte's village), I noticed a development of new houses called “Richmond Manor”. Obviously, a small Nationalist village in West Tyrone has zero historical connection with a suburban town in SW London. Yet the suck-up mentality is deeply-ingrained.

Local councils should have naming policies which seek to foster, not extinguish, local identity. Simply adapt a local geographical feature / local historical incident / local placename or townland name / local person's name. Not difficult.

Of course, this is too much for the colonised Irish mindset. Endless genuflecting to England. Go and live in England lads, you won't see this sucking up reciprocated. Say what you like about the English, but they're patriots to a man and woman, unlike Paddy, who's still desperate to be liked by his former masters. A shrink would have a field day with the Irish cultural cringe mentality. Truly pathetic.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top