[ANDY-J3]

Originally posted by Calum Mac Neill

Therefore, to introduce some reality I raise the point that, for example, the 17th century Statutes of Iona originated without the Gaelic sphere, not within it, and that, if you perceive Gaels to be to blame for, eg, the 17th century anti-Gaelic acts of the Scottish parliament, or if you continue to ignore this and other facts as I present them, then you are ultimately taking an oppressor's stance on the question, as per Franco's measures after the Spanish civil war, ie, that they deserve what happened to them, they did it to themselves, no es culpa nuestra. To pretend that I do not present these facts is to attempt to deny their existence, just as an oppressor denies oppressive acts. In this respect, you continue to represent the Anglophone culture's ultimately anti-Scottish character.


I don't know why you introduce a reference to Franco? Is it perhaps because you hoped that a bit of obfuscation would muddy the waters and hide the fundamental weakness of your argument? It's hardly a valid analogy. You don't seem to grasp the point that whatever policies the Scottish government would have liked to enact in the sevententh century their abilities to implement their wishes in areas as remote as the highlands and islands were extremely limited. This is where textual evidence would help you out- you can show that the Scottish government in Edinburgh enacted a given policy but what you haven't attempted show is to what degree it was actually implemented. The very fact that you subsequently had several Jacobite rebellions in the highlands shows the extent to which highlanders up until the eighteenth century were a law unto themselves who paid little heed to the wishes of lowland politicians or monarchs.



One of the clearest examples of Highland chiefs acting against their own people would be during the Highland clearances, except that the chiefs had already been incorporated into the - surprise, surprise - Anglophone aristocracy.

But to be fair it should be pointed out that they freely made a choice to do so- no one held a gun to their head and forced them to reject their Gaelic heritage.



Genes do not give you a language. If almost all Scots have Gaelic genes, why don't they speak Gaelic and why do so many complain about Gaelic?

No but they give you a sense of your heritage. The fact that I have Gaelic lineage gives me a sense of connection with highland culture and history. The fact that I don't happen to speak Gaelic doesn't diminish that sense of connection. As regards the attitudes that you allege so many Scots display you would need to ask them that because as I've said I haven't actually encountered that attitude myself.




Yesterday, it was Caithness people complaining about Highland Region's bilingual road-signs and still protesting that Gaelic was never spoken in Caithness. This is typical Anglophone fact denial of the sort you display. Gaelic was of course once spoken throughout Caithness with a small Anglophone minority in the north-east corner.

Or perhaps it's just the residents of Caithness complaining about an issue that is relevant to them. If you feel so strongly about it why not write a letter yourself to the newspaper and challenge them about their motivations?