Why Zack Polanski’s rise should worry British Jews

Zack Polanski, the leader of the Green Party, may say that he is proud of his Jewish heritage, but his actions differ from his words.

Just last month, his own relatives said that his politics have left them alienated from him and fearful of what would happen if he were to reach Downing Street. One relative reportedly went as far as to say, “He’s currently the leader of the future Islamic party of Britain, that’s what the Green Party is fast becoming. And there would be no place for Jews in an Islamic state of Britain.”

If the “Zionism is Racism” motion he backed had passed, which would have equated Zionism with racism and called for the abolishment of the sole Jewish state in favour of the establishment of a “single democratic Palestinian State in all of historic Palestine with Jerusalem as its capital,” he would have branded his own mother, among other close family members, as racists. (Polanski’s mother has openly expressed support for Israel across several social media posts; his own sister has voiced support for pro-Israel organisations and events.)

But that is not all that the Zionism is Racism motion would have accomplished. The proposed motion backed the right of the Palestinian people to “resistance and liberation from Israeli occupation, domination and subjugation,” asserting that “the struggle to achieve that liberation by all available means under international law is legitimate.” It would have formally disavowed the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism, claiming that it has been “weaponised to silence legitimate criticism of the State of Israel,” and called for a ban on members who identify as Zionists.

The implications are obvious regarding the sort of environment this will create. This rhetoric of “Resistance and liberation from Israeli occupation” is essentially verbatim from the likes of the Iranian regime, Hamas and Hezbollah.

Among tightly-knit sections of the anti-Israel left, there is this consistent theme behind their chants and jeers: “What side of history do you want to be on?” This self-righteousness of theirs, this refusal to see the missing shade of grey in all arguments that suit them, appears to be making itself very prevalent here. They may think that they are on the side of the Palestinian “resistance,” but that word is little more than a euphemism for terrorists. And, if the world’s largest exporter of Islamist terrorism and its proxies are on your side, what does that tell you about it?

But there is another detail, one almost so small amidst the chaos of the antisemitic frenzy that it would otherwise go unnoticed. That is the very gruesome beauty of it. You read above that the motion called for a ban on members who identify as Zionists. Ordinarily, that would seem just another clause in the vile extremist burrow of social rejects that is the Green Party, but let us examine that further: imagine a centre-left citizen wishes to join the Conservative, or even Reform, Party. Granted, it would appear odd, but they would be welcome to do so. What we see in the Green Party is quite the opposite: members with opinions contrary to those of the Party elite and the mob would be actively sought out and banned.

Cults operate through a rigid, authoritarian ideology designed to create total dependency, in which the accepted “truth” is exclusively defined by a charismatic leader or elite.

Now, I saw Zack Polanski speaking at Polecon recently, and I can tell you that he is certainly a captivating speaker. That is his claim to power. Charming, magnetic speakers leverage intense emotional connections, compelling storytelling and an appealing presence to align their followers with their vision. Tick, tick, tick.

Once you have your audience on your side, you may say essentially whatever you wish. Polanski’s formula was simple: pair broadly popular domestic promises that seem inherently common sense, and later sneak in a sweeping moral claim on foreign policy that the audience accepts in blindness. “Fix the NHS, fix the climate, fix the economy, and stop the genocide!”

I remember his address. And that is the point. Once you can remember something, and hold it clearly in your mind, you can replay it. As the “Big Lie” concept goes: a lie told often and loudly enough becomes the truth.

Once that notion becomes the truth, dissent is hardly a difference of opinion; it is an existential threat to the group’s “fantasy” or purpose. Ostracism is the mechanism used to maintain conformity, prevent critical thinking, and enforce absolute loyalty to the elite. This is Animal Farm 101.

Do we see the pattern here?

In the end, the vote did not go through – not because of an outbreak of simple, common sense within the party, but rather because of technical difficulties and the Zoom meeting’s clock running out before the motion could be put to a vote, despite it being extended by an additional fifteen minutes.

The motion will not be taken off the table altogether and will be voted on at a later date. That means that there is still time for it to return, and for the Green Party to show its true colours to the electorate – although one wonders if anyone will have the courage to think beyond the line and recognise this for what it is: intolerance in the clothes of progress.