On Saturday, George Chittick added another commandment to the canon of Ulster loyalism: Thou shalt not learn Irish. Because for an Irish protestant to further their understanding of Ireland's native language is to play into the hands of a "Republican agenda". George was subsequently challenged on this quite sectarian attitude by a BBC interviewer, and responded with an incoherent diatribe that invoked fears of discrimination in employment, before quickly escalating into a comparison between a Northern Ireland with an Irish-speaking population and the Nazi justification for the annexation of the Sudetenland. You can see a video of the exchange at the link above, I'll not comment further on it for now other than to point out that George's office in the Orange Order is that of County Grand master for Belfast. As in, this is the guy that the Orange Order in Belfast has decided should be in charge and should represent them in public.
George's PR and public oratory shortcomings aside, this episode reminded me once again of something that I, as a Southerner, have found difficult to get my head around since I moved to the North. Which is the fact that one side of the community here has somehow managed to grow up and live in Ireland without ever learning anything about, or even having any sort of exposure to, the Irish language (with probably the only lamentable exception to that being "tiocfaidh ár lá"). And, in fact, in many cases that can be extended beyond the language to Irish history, and even to Irish geography beyond the border.
By way of example: My daughter has a reasonably common Irish first name. Asking someone here to pronounce it is about as reliable a way of working out which foot they kick with as asking them to pronounce the letter "H", or asking them what school they went to. Confront half the population with a word, something as common as a personal name, spelled in the native language of the geographical entity they were born and raised in, and they'll probably pronounce it incorrectly. How does that state of affairs come about?
Another example: My wife (who is Northern Irish) was raised Presbyterian, and educated in state schools. The history curriculum she was taught was heavily focussed on English history. It barely, if ever, touched upon the history of Ireland. Anything she does know about the history of Ireland is no thanks to the education system as experienced by protestants here. She has recounted to me conversations with other (protestant) people she knows who were surprised to learn that Northern Ireland only came into existence in the early 1920's - they assumed, based on their cultural upbringing, and in the absence of being exposed to any facts to the contrary, that Ireland had been divided into 2 distinct cultural and political entities for centuries if not forever.
To me, as something of an outsider in Northern Ireland, there seems to be a sort of weird cultural amnesia at work here. Mostly rooted in a basic lack of information, but sometimes in a willful ignorance of certain things in case knowing too much about them would call one's loyalty into question. Which is a strange idea - that you can become less of a person by knowing or learning something. Especially if it's something that's common knowledge amongst the other side.
Which brings me back to the contention that the Irish language has been "politicised". In the midst of George's paranoid ramblings, there is actually an element of truth - which is that Sinn Fein have contributed to the Irish language becoming something of a political football. They are entitled to argue for the language to be officially recognised on this side of the border, as it should be. But there's a line between advocacy and conspicuous over-promotion for the sake of optics across which I feel they stray repeatedly. There's probably more electoral advantage to be gained from pushing hard on this topic, and giving an easy win to the predictable bigotry of someone like Edwin Poots (who claimed burying an Irish Language Act as one of his greatest political achievements during his tenure as culture minister), than there is in taking a more subtle approach that might deliver more incremental progress. Sinn Fein get to look like they're fighting for nationalists' interests, and get to point at the anti-Irish bigoted Unionist bogeyman as the problem. Unionists get to show their electorate how they've thwarted any perceived diminution of Britishness. Each tribe's interests are defended at the expense of themmuns, and the natural order of sectarian politics here is maintained.
George Chittick is playing the anti-irish bigoted Unionist bogeyman to perfection. In doing so, he's cutting off his nose to spite his own face. And he's also betraying people of both main traditions who would like to further their own understanding of a vital part of Ireland's cultural heritage. If, as George argues, the language is as much a part of his tradition as anyone else's, but it has been politicised, then why not try to reclaim it? Why not do as has been done in East Belfast, and get people interested in Irish by educating them about the role of protestants in the history of the language? Why concede the ground to those whom you argue are presenting a one-sided picture?
Why? Because it's easier to circle the wagons and play to your own crowd. To sell them a false narrative of clear black-and-white, Us vs. Them. And maybe because, if politics was taken out of the Irish language, and everyone learned a bit more about it, they might learn that they have more in common with the other side than they thought. That the divisions between the two tribes here aren't as clear as some would have you believe.
And we couldn't have that, now could we?
