Have the Greens just voted for a de facto ban on Jews?

The News Agents

The episode examines the UK Green Party's conference vote adopting a motion declaring 'Zionism is racism' and calling for a single democratic Palestinian state, which has sparked widespread

Key takeaways

• The Green Party passed the 'Zionism is racism' motion by a vote of 1,022 in favour to 813 against at their Brighton conference.
• Former Green leader Adrian Ramsey publicly condemned the policy, stating it contradicts long-standing party principles and equal rights for Israelis and Palestinians.

Main topics

• Green Party conference motion
• Zionism and anti-Semitism debate

Notable quotes

"It doesn't reflect my view and I don't think it reflects long-standing Green principles either."

Conclusion

The episode underscores a significant ideological shift within the UK Green Party that has triggered

Transcript preview

Speaker 4 (0:00) you Speaker 1 (0:02) This is a global production. Speaker 3 (0:04) I'm deeply saddened that this motion has passed. It doesn't reflect my view and I don't think it reflects long-standing Green principles either. We've always supported a right to self-determination and the manifesto on which I was elected in 2024 made clear that Israelis and Palestinians should have equal rights. Speaker 1 (0:22) That is Adrian Ramsey, the former leader of the Green Party, expressing his disappointment that the party has adopted a Zionism... is racism policy, which calls for a single Palestinian state, the end of the state of Israel, and for Jews in the Green Party, well, what? Speaker 4 (0:41) Those who voted for it will tell you this is about ideology, not religion. But have the Greens essentially just voted for de facto ban on Jews? Welcome to the News Agents. Speaker 1 (1:00) The News Agents. It's John. It's Meles. And we were in Brighton on Friday for the Green Party conference where kind of inevitably, and we were sort of overtaken by the Zionism is racism debate, by people coming over to our microphones and want to express their passionate views on this subject. And sure enough, that motion has now been carried. And the implications of it, I think, has caused... unbelievable, widespread alarm across the Jewish community, whether you are pro-Israel, whether you're critical of the government in Israel, whatever. But all shades of opinion seem to have reacted with horror to this motion, which essentially calls for the end of the state of Israel with no clear answer of what happens to the 10 million Jews who are living there and what it means if you're a green supporter and you're Jewish. about whether you're going to have to go through some kind of purity test now to see whether you can remain a member of the Green Party. Yeah, just to run Speaker 4 (2:02) you through that motion, which was proposed by members of the Greens for Palestine group, it passed by a vote of members on Sunday with 1,022 in favour. 813 against. So not a slam dunk, but a clear win for those who wanted it passed. And their leader, their own leader, Zach Polanski, abstained. He didn't cast a vote. And this is because he says, or their spokesman says, he was on the campaign trail in Hobart and St Pancras, which is on Thursday, in which he was standing. So if you like, his mind was elsewhere. But I think it is relevant that of the actual Green MPs, Four out of five were against. They voted against. Senior Greens in the party have been warning that this will not only be divisive, but it will scare Jewish members and make them feel unwelcome in the party. Because the motion passed means that Zionism, just to clarify, that is the movement, the ideology that led to the creation of Israel as a Jewish state back in 1948, will be treated as any other form of racism. by the party. And when you speak to those, as you did on Friday, when you speak to those, you will find that they keep on resisting this idea that it is anti-Semitic because they say anti-Semitism is about Jews or the religion and Zionism, anti-Zionism is about a political ideology. But there are places now where that gets incredibly conflated. And one of them is in this amendment to the motion, which was going to say that obviously... Speaker 4 (3:46) Jews will be able to associate with community centres, with synagogues, with places of interest that might call themselves Zionist. That got dropped. It was voted down as an amendment. So in other words, if you are a Jewish person living in Britain, even if you feel really strongly against what has happened in Gaza, in Israel. in recent years or in past decades, you would not be able to associate or to attend a synagogue without the Green Party motion considering you racist or participating, let's say, in racism. And I think that will be unfathomable to so many people who have tried so hard to delineate, frankly. between what constitutes political activity and what constitutes cultural, religious, spiritual Speaker 1 (4:47) belief. And look, there are a million varieties of Zionists, but the basic foundational belief of Zionism is that there should be a Jewish homeland recognised by international law on what was the historic homeland. of the Jews, namely Jerusalem and the surrounding areas, which you can go back thousands of years and find that there has always been a Jewish population there. It's not about offering support for Ben-Gavir or Netanyahu or Smotrich, these terrible people who have done absolutely terrible things. It's just about whether you believe in a state of Israel should have a right to exist. And I think what this does is it means that the... Green Party will be able to discipline or sanction Jewish members who go to a synagogue which is seen as Zionist. Now, frankly, there is barely a synagogue in the country which doesn't believe in some shape or form in a state of Israel, a safe place for Jews to go where they can practice in freedom. And so it's not surprising that the Jewish community is saying, I'm sorry. You can't say this isn't anti-Semitic. It is clearly anti-Semitic in the fact that it is saying to Jews, you have to prove that you are not in any shape, size or form a Zionist. Otherwise, you're a racist. And if you're a racist, we're going to boot you out of the party. And so it's a very arrogant position for the Green Party to take, to say we are going to define what Zionism is. And if you want to be part of our party, you have to disavow any association in any part of your life. with bits of Zionism? Look, I think there is Speaker 4 (6:24) genuinely a legitimate argument which is shared by not just some Jews, but some Israeli Jews as well, and I've been speaking to some this morning, who think that there is a fundamental injustice at the heart of Zionism. In other words, the establishment of the State of Israel... And even before that, in 47-48, created this knack by this displacement of many Palestinian people. It sort of, you know, pushed them out of their villages, out of their homes, out of their workplaces. And as we know, this was because of the way the British government divided up the land between Israel and Palestine to create the state of Israel post-Holocaust. Now, there are some people who kind of will go back to that and say, look, you start with that grave injustice. And there is something fundamental about nationhood or nationalism, which sows the seeds right at the beginning to essentially an unjust state. I guess the real question here is. Name one country that hasn't started with a history of oppression somewhere along the lines and hasn't displaced one person over another. I mean, you can go to America, which is 300 years old. Speaker 1 (7:48) Native Americans. Speaker 4 (7:49) I don't hear people saying, well, I think America is fundamentally a racist country because of the indigenous people it pushed out. Or a much more recent example, Liberia. Right. The whole creation of the country, the modern country, Liberia, was on top of ethnic people of that country before when America basically created this state to put its former slaves in. It put former African-American slaves. In Liberia, they had no connection to Liberia, but it started building a country there on top of indigenous people. And that created huge amounts of bloodshed, you know, a civil war of 250,000. And yet I don't hear people mentioning Liberia. I don't hear people mentioning the formation of America. I don't hear people mentioning. And I think this is the problem. You can totally focus on the indigenous rights of any people. And obviously it's... more complicated in the question of Israel because, you know, the Jews, the Israelis would say, well, they were totally indigenous to Israel going back, you know, to Canaan, to pre-Bible times, to centuries old times. But I think you can have a question about, you know, who is displaced at any point and where that becomes unequal. But it is extraordinary and very, very striking that Israel is the only country. in the modern world that faces questions, I think, about its displacement Speaker 1 (9:17) of people. And you look, you know, there are very specific circumstances about the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948. It came after the Holocaust when two thirds of European Jewry was wiped out in gas ovens in a systematic, you know, destruction, annihilation. of a race because that was part of nazi ideology and where were these people to go and so again there is an argument that is used this is a colonialist thing that has happened with the formation of the state of israel but that doesn't really withstand scrutiny because it's not like they could go back to anywhere you know when the french were in algeria the french could go back to france Where could these Jews go back to afterwards? And the only thing that was near to a homeland of the Jews, historically, as you say, Emily, is to the creation of a state of Israel. I do think, though, it's worth dwelling on the politics of now, because you mentioned it about Zach Polanski not being there. This is massively controversial. This, I think, calls into question whether the Green Party can be seen as a mainstream... political party given the motion that has been passed given the fact that it calls for the destruction of the state of israel and who knows what happens to the 10 million people who are there and zach polanski if you want to lead the party lead in support of the motion if you support it if you oppose the motion why aren't you leading in opposition to the motion but should not be there To not even vote, to make yourself absent from Brighton when this vote is taking place does not look like leadership. It looks like cowardice. And I think that it is kind of slightly extraordinary that Zach Polanski say, well, I didn't really know much. You know, I wasn't there. So I'm not, you know, I'm sorry. You proclaim proudly the fact that you are Jewish yourself and that you have got Jewish identity. And yet at this critical moment, you are absent. and not there. And I think that is very, very hard to explain. I also think it makes it very easy, Speaker 4 (11:27) actually, for the Labour Party, because don't forget, a lot of these figures and a lot of this language would