How so?
Yes I’d heard that … an unknown number …
Because they emigrated there after WW2
Yes but those emigrating there would have had to prove Jewish heritage and often these days that is via DNA. It’s not easy to gain citizenship there without Jewish roots and it’s very difficult to be accepted as a convert. I know someone who tried and went through the whole process only to be rejected by the ruling council in Britain. He was devastated and they don’t have to give a reason.
Not sure what an opportunistic bandwagonist’s views actually are. I doubt that he does either.
1 Like
Did you know that less than 1% of the Green Party membership took part in the vote regarding Zionism, and even among those that did, it wasn’t a thumping huge majority.
Even Polanski and the European Green movement distanced themselves from the outcome.
Makes one wonder, eh?
1 Like
It was a publicity stunt
It has everyone talking about the green party
DNA wasn’t a thing in 1948. Their Eastern European heritage has not been denied.
They were European Jews as opposed to Middle Eastern.
Once you start to research it it’s pretty fascinating studying Jewish population dispersal prior to WW2 and how many went to Israel …
Even now, Netanyahu’s real family surname name is Mileikowsky (Polish Jews) and was changed by his father when he moved to Mandatory Palestine.
1 Like
Poland had the biggest population of Jews in the world prior to Wwii because they were granted sanctuary there by the king during the Spanish inquisition and other expulsions. However unlike other nations they were not required to integrate.
Wasn’t there a fair few in Russia too ? …
1 Like
Yes but thats likely to have been because Poland was at one point up to the Black sea and then partitioned by Catherine the Great in the 18th C so most of Eastern Poland became part of the Russian empire. She also forced the Jews into the Pale at the far edges of the original Russian borders and curtailed their rights. There would have been a fair bit of movement of the population during her time and up to WWi.
1 Like
I’ll be honest. I’m struggling with the policy of equating Zionism with racism. To do so would mean to eradicate a two state solution which, in real terms, would mean a single (Palestinian) state and a likely genocide against Jews, again.
There’s also the issue that the UK Green Party voted for their policy based not on any potential moral disgust of the actions in Gaza, but more of a protest against UK colonialism. In simple terms, they don’t give a monkeys about the welfare of people in the region, but do care about the UK sticking its oar in.
I base my second paragraph on the interview made by Polanski on radio 4 today.
1 Like
he’s getting far too much airtime which goes back to my point about this simply being a publicity stunt
Yes 85000 deaths apparently, how is that addressed, without a policy, of sorts, how many ism’s are involved?
1 Like
Eh? Where did you get that figure from?
I do doubt that. An extreme left element of the Green party decided to take advantage of the party’s poorly structured internal rules and push through a policy while most were not participating. The participation in the discussion and vote was small and yet passing it pushed it into official policy. There was no party leadership (I don’t just mean Polanski but all in leadership roles) review or endorsement.
So what does this tell us above and beyond the issue of the policy itself? It certainly makes the Green party look naive and immature as a political entity. It demonstrates a lack of awareness about how it presents itself. The policy may have been a genuine attempt to criticise Israel but was poorly thought through and most likely its intent was actually more malevolent than that. It clearly shows that its internal governship rules are lax.
How it gets itself out of this mess is a mystery. Yes everyone is now talking about the Green party but not in a way that is going to increase support or votes.
1 Like
Apart from Mothin Ali, a deputy leader?
I stand corrected. Having read a bit more I now see that 4 out of 5 Green MPs voted against this motion. So Green party leadership was involved and the motion was allowed to be debated and the motion was allowed to pass into party policy.
I think that is an even more damning reflection on the party’s abilities and maturity.
2 Likes