21

Zack Polanski has said he will not accept anyone being excluded from the Green Party "because of the religious or communal body they are part of", after members adopted a motion declaring Zionism a form of racism.

The Green leader said "no-one will be made unwelcome because of their background, their faith, or where they worship".

The motion defines Zionism as an ideology supporting "an ethnonationalist Jewish state" and backs a "single democratic Palestinian state in all of historic Palestine".

He added: "As leader I will not accept any exclusion, or refusal to engage with anyone, because of the religious or communal body they are part of."

The motion has exposed divisions between the party's newly enlarged membership base under leader Zack Polanski and its MPs elected at the last general election.

Polanski did not take part in the vote on Sunday and four of the party's five MPs opposed it.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] danielquinn@lemmy.ca 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Of course I agree with the motion. I'm a thinking person with a reasonable understanding of the history of the region. I'm assuming you are too, but I hate to break it to you, you aren't most people.

Most people don't understand that Zionism ≠ Judaism and this motion will absolutely not help in their education. It will alienate them, and the media will have more ammo to paint us with the "extreme crazies" brush. Worse still, people within the party who have joined, perhaps even as their first foray into politics are going to feel alienated. The party will appear to have been co-opted by a bunch of masturbatory academics, bent on spending time and resources defining a word that has no effect other than to piss people off and alienate them. Indeed that's all the party's been talking about over the last few days: the fact that this motion is meaningless. So what have we accomplished exactly?

This is a classic case of the Left's favourite pastimes: purity tests and virtue signalling. Now everyone who pushed for this meaningless exercise can pat themselves on the back for being enlightened and they can look down on everyone who opposed it, abstained, or dared to clarify its meaning as Polanski has done here. Then, when the taste of that passes, they can get back to sabotaging any real work (which requires cooperation, something these people cannot understand) by choosing a new group of people to alienate.

Next up: the meat-eaters. It's bad for the animals and the environment. Fuck those guys. Let's pass a motion declaring meat-eating evil. Actually, that's not good enough. Roll the pansy-assed vegetarians in there because they lack the conviction of proper vegans.

This is what this sort of politics breeds, and it doesn't stop until you have a party of just 8 people who think they're better than everyone else while giving the other 7 the side-eye.

Politics is about community and working with others — others who may not agree with you on everything, who may not have made the same journey you have (yet?) to come to the same conclusions, but you have enough in common to pull together to get things done. These people have done the opposite. They've driven a wedge into the party for zero benefit, to (as you say) "filter out" people they don't like. Palestinians won't benefit from a bunch of Britons defining a word. They would have benefitted from the blockage of arms sales to Israel, but they've set back any progress we could have possibly had on that now.

It's just so dumb, and selfish, and navel-gazing. And the reaction here to Polanski, rejecting him if he should dare do anything other than to embrace this idiot motion... it's just so counterproductive.

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

So what you're saying is that this doesn't affect you and your treats, so therefore you don't care and nobody should care about it either.

The comparison between this and calling the consumption of meat evil is quite a massive leap.

You've seen what happened to Corbyn. If the Greens don't cleanse themselves from Zionists that same fate would await them if they ever got to power. So this is an amazing, very important and extremely relevant motion.

So far everyone I've seen upset about this motion, agrees with the motion itself but is just afraid of the media backlash from all the Zionists supporting it. It's only controversial because they've made you believe it's controversial.

[-] danielquinn@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 day ago

It's controversial by definition. It's sewing controversy. In the party, in the media, and in the broader public. To pretend otherwise is to live in a world without facts.

And I don't know what you're on about regarding my "treats". You and I share the same goal: liberation of the Palestinian people, but while you're content to derail any progress we might have made on that front in an effort to "cleanse" the party, I'd rather we find a way to do something for them. Nice use of the word "cleanse" there, very inclusive. I'm sure the people who still associate Zionism with Judaism and fear another Holocaust would absolutely love to be part of a party with people using that sort of language.

This isn't a conversation that's going to be productive (much like every other conversation around this over the next 6-12 months) so I'm tapping out. You should come back to this in a year though and ask yourself just what this stunt has wrought and how we might have better served Palestine with that time if only we hadn't been obsessed with tightening the noose of virtue around each other.

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

The "controversy" being a few extremely koud racist Zionists in the party which want to hijack the party for their own agenda.

Exactly the people you need to filter out before your party grows or they will become a cancer like they did for Labour.

Like I said, everyone here agrees with the motion, but they're just somehow afraid that it's controversial and the only reason you believe it's controversial is because everyone keeps telling you so.

this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2026
21 points (92.0% liked)

United Kingdom

6960 readers
272 users here now

General community for news/discussion in the UK.

Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.

Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS