Described by a national newspaper in 1915 as Ireland's best-known nationalist figure, Arthur Griffith and his ideology had clearly acquired, at the very least, a wide recognition throughout Ireland. . To explain his ideology, we can situate his ideas within a framework of long-term thought patterns and relate them to short-term contextual impulses that refined his social and political credo. Allowing for a broad “geographic” scope will also benefit our discussion; Griffith, for example, often used the Austro-Hungarian relationship as a model for Irish political life. Finding where international contexts intersect with Irish contexts, coupled with a recognition of long and short term developments, will thus provide us with the best method for explaining Griffith's ideology. We must recognize that Griffith could be a "chameleon" political figure and that his "ideology" was not necessarily firm, although the fluidity of his ideology may in itself be useful in explaining how he formulated his thought process . To understand how and if recognition of Griffith and his ideology translated into "influence", one must then: contextualize when and if Griffith's political or social ideas were implemented directly in specific organizations or colored their composition (this, for example, might be found in constitutions or entry requirements) will explain any influence it has had. Likewise, the way in which Griffith himself was able to directly influence others to change their minds will serve to nuance Griffith's influence. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on 'Why violent video games should not be banned'?Get the original essayA central tenet of Griffith's ideology was passive resistance to British rule. In fact, Griffith viewed parliamentary absenteeism as passive resistance; in a 1902 speech, Griffith had called on parliamentarians to emulate the Hungarian supporters of Franz Deak, who refused to sit in the Austrian parliament until their demands were met. To understand his alignment with this principle, we must combine the longer-term Irish historical context with his experience in South Africa in the late 1890s. While Irish politics had been dominated by the parliamentary action of figures like Isaac Butt and Charles Stewart Parnell in the late 1800s there was a competing school of thought which saw Irish involvement at Westminster as undermining the nationalist cause. The Irishman newspaper, as early as 1878, declared that “a nationalist must necessarily cease to be a nationalist” if he takes the parliamentary oath and takes his seat. However, Parnell's turn to the left after his fall in 1891 had a more direct influence on Griffith's thought process. For Griffith, this was a marker that revealed the “leader’s” true opposition to the parliamentarians; Set against the backdrop of the failure of two Home Rule Bills, this development began to pave the way for ideas regarding extra-parliamentary tactics to pressure the British. What really compounded these Irish historical precedents was the Boer War in South Africa. Although Griffith admired the resilience of the Boers in their struggle against the British Empire, their ultimate failure indicated to him that Irish armed resistance would be an equally futile enterprise. Likewise, after he left for South Africa in 1897, the centenary of the failed rebellion of 1798 would no doubt have influenced his thinking as the events of the American War unfolded.Boers were taking place; The ideal of armed resistance was not only a failure in South Africa, but it had already failed in Ireland. Add to this his view that parliamentarians were equally ineffective, and we have now discovered Griffith's reasons for promoting passive resistance through parliamentary absenteeism. The influence of its ideology of passive resistance is a little more difficult to assert, but there are two direct and clear consequences of this. :Immediately, Griffith allied with other nationalist groups such as Inghinidhe na hEireann (the Daughters of Ireland) to bring relief to the Boers and, perhaps more importantly, allowed parliamentary absenteeism to beginning to be seen as a genuinely useful tactic. Regarding the immediate influence on the Boer War, Griffith and Maud Gonne were instrumental in organizing the sending of medical supplies to the Boers fighting the British, and similarly in setting up funding programs for the Irish who wanted to go fight for the Boers in South Africa. . This form of nationalist agitation thus began to publicize the extra-parliamentary tactics associated with Griffith. Over a longer period, and perhaps more importantly, Griffith's ideals came to have a direct impact on Irish politics. When, for example, the Liberal government attempted to buy out the Irish Parliamentary Party with an insufficient Council Bill in 1905, MP CJ Dolan resigned and joined forces with Griffith. Although the initial effect of this decision was somewhat inconsequential, it begins to show how Griffith's ideology influenced political tactics. But it also shows that Griffith's influence initially depended on the direct political context; just as Dolan joined the party in response to the Liberals' failure in 1905, when John Redmond won considerable victories in the 1910 general election, Griffith's advocacy of parliamentary absenteeism has been hugely discredited. Notably, the organization through which he publicized his doctrine "at that time known as Sinn Fein" declined rapidly, from more than ninety branches of the organization in 1909 to one central branch operating in Dublin in 1910. Nevertheless, historical circumstances ultimately served to cement Griffith's ideology within the Irish political framework; following the attempt to impose conscription on Ireland in 1917, Griffith persuaded Redmond to join forces with Eamon de Valera (now president of Sinn Fein) to oppose the British government. It is important to note that the first pledge in Sinn Fein's 1918 manifesto was to "withdraw Irish representation from the British Parliament". In essence, just as Griffith's truancy ideology consisted of a series of long-term and short-term issues, the influence of ideology can be interpreted as having similar implications in the short term and then in longer term, for Irish politics. Griffith's ideology was based on his belief in Irish independence, echoed in the name of the organization he founded, Sinn Fein, literally translated as "Ourselves". Just as Griffith had called on Irish MPs to form their own legislature, economic independence from Britain and Irish protectionism were central to his doctrine. Indeed, Griffiths' initial three-tiered economic policy focused on: boycotting English goods, getting local councils to favor Irish businesses with contracts, and creating a General Council to protect industry Irish.The formation of this ideology was, once again, precipitated by long and short term Irish and European contextual issues and realities. Griffith saw Hungarian success as due in part to the fact that they had sufficient resources within their own nation to no longer depend on Austria. In Ireland he firmly believed that there were significant untapped coal resources which the country could use to supplement its own industry. There were also specific Irish precedents that complemented his economic ideology; events such as the Tithe War of 1831–39 had seen the Irish refuse to purchase confiscated goods. Griffith identified this, in an article in his newspaper, the United Irishman, as a direct response to the call to "confidence in yourselves" and was therefore central to "Sinn Fein policy". Added to his observation that Ireland was paying more than its fair share of taxes to Britain, these precedents and issues came together to form the backdrop for Griffith's economic ideology. both small-scale economic agitation and, on a larger scale, influencing both the labor movement in Ireland and the politics of Sinn Fein. At the local level, Griffith's influence is illustrated by the attempt to counter the 1907 International Trade Exhibition with an Irish National Trade Exhibition. Not only was it a form of localized agitation, but it was also endorsed by the Archbishop of Dublin, the GAA, and several other nationalist organizations. The exhibition aimed not only to showcase Irish industry, but also to enable the sale of 10,000 shares of Irish companies to Irish buyers, thus combining a symbolic adulation of Irish industry with a practical focus on economic development Irish. Although the exhibition plans were ultimately abandoned, the project's approval nevertheless reveals the influence of his ideology. Thus, Griffith's ideology was not only capable of influencing activity at the local level, but had already begun to attract the attention of much more influential figures and organizations. Moreover, Griffith's policies ultimately formed the building blocks of much larger organizations. Notably, in 1913, union leader TR Johnson and an elderly Sinn Feiner, TO Kelly, incorporated many of Griffith's demands, such as control of Irish resources and the development of industry, into their projected development program. Griffith's influence is also clear in Sinn Fein's 1918 election manifesto; it called for an end to "the decline of our industrial life and the ever-increasing financial plunder of our country", thus linking Griffith's calls to propel Ireland into an "agricultural and manufacturing state" and reflecting his criticism of overtaxation. As such, Griffith's economic ideology had been translated from theory to the physical makeup of large organizations, thus illustrating his influence. However, we should briefly qualify this influence. The economic ideas of protectionism and industrial development were taken up, but his use of the Hungarian model was scorned by socialists and a number of workers' supporters; James Connolly, founder of the Irish Socialist Republican Party, criticized the Hungarian connection, stating that "Hungary's productive classes are being denied the right to vote and the country is in a chronic state of rebellion and unrest." Although some of Griffith's economic ideology managed to gain influence, his overall economic framework was not