3 hours ago, Steve201 said:

The irony is the Israeli state is currently boasting about ethnic cleansing in southern Lebanon and the outrage is all about the Green Party notion stating Israels official ideology is racist.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

All it's demonstrated is a vaccumm of leadership from Polanski bottling a vote and the radical members of the group hijacking the Party, which will lessen the Party as an electoral force, demonstrating they have zero idea about leadership or gaining electoral power. A lesson in how to do politics badly.

5 hours ago, Rooney said:

Two wrongs don't make a right.

All it's demonstrated is a vaccumm of leadership from Polanski bottling a vote and the radical members of the group hijacking the Party, which will lessen the Party as an electoral force, demonstrating they have zero idea about leadership or gaining electoral power. A lesson in how to do politics badly.

Or perhaps they are pushing the debate along to a different position after considering the effects of the Burnham bounce on their party over the next few years.

2 hours ago, Steve201 said:

Or perhaps they are pushing the debate along to a different position after considering the effects of the Burnham bounce on their party over the next few years.

A position aligned with discrimination no matter how the PR team within the Party try and explain it. Not sure that helps the debate, if anything it has the opposite effect in my view.

It does send the unfortunate message that the biggest concern of the Green Party of Britain is something foreign rather than something British which then kinda undermines the rest of their policy positions.

37 minutes ago, J00prstar said:

It does send the unfortunate message that the biggest concern of the Green Party of Britain is something foreign rather than something British which then kinda undermines the rest of their policy positions.

*Green Party of England and Wales, the Scottish Greens are entirely separate.

I agree that this is what the outcome of the conference has ended up being to the public, but this is not necessarily a message that the Greens can decide, rather it is what the media have run with. The leader's speech does mention Gaza more than most parties but it doesn't dominate the speech at all.

This is such an own goal. A few months ago the Greens were a huge electoral force, they've dwindled partly to their credit, because they've finally pushed Labour back to the left a bit, at least on rhetoric and policy to a limited degree, and could well partially be credited for getting Burnham into Downing Street, but they've also declined partly because they keep making ridiculous decisions that they should know the relentless press in this country will seize on.

I like that it's a democratic party, but if the leader and most MPs aren't behind this and it's a vote from such a small proportion of the membership (just under 1% of total members, the ones in the room at the conference), is that really democratic? I feel like their system needs a shake up, ballot their members like a damn union. It comes off as unprofessional. They were really doing well with cost of living, wealth taxes, and it's actually really good to see them talking more about the climate again. Of course Israel/ Palestine is an important issue, but it's divisive, they couldn't even agree on this motion amongst themselves - 1,022 votes to 813 - roughly 56% to 44%. Not quite Brexit figures (and obviously a much smaller sample size) but not far off.

It is really tiring to see this issue front and centre of British politics with this tone to it, especially within a party not in power. It shouldn't be controversial, it's an easy win to say "what's happening in Gaza is an atrocity". What the Greens should be doing (and any other political party honestly) is condemning the war crimes in Gaza and the West Bank, condemning UK weapons sales to Israel while the conflict persists, and condemning the Israeli government for being fascistic and propagating an apartheid state. Beyond that, this issue should not be their focus and they should remember which country they belong to. Of course the public cares about foreign conflict, but when is the last time anyone mentioned Sudan? I get why there is more focus on this one as the UK is more tacitly involved, but the Greens aren't a party in Israel. They should really be a unifying force on the left that pressures Labour to move towards them lest they lose support, not one making emotive controversial proclamations that are frankly irrelevant because they wouldn't be implemented even in the scenario of a Green government, and it will hurt them electorally when they have so many policies that the public would be fully behind. It just reeks of the kind of leftist purism that has ceded ground to the right time and again because they're squabbling amongst themselves over the fine print.

What they shouldn't be doing is punching above their weight and start writing foreign policy that will never come to pass, and really seems quite colonial and interventionist in the way it's prescribed. A single state solution in favour of Palestine implies expulsion of Israelis which isn't realistic or moral, in the same way that the expulsion and genocide of Palestinians is immoral. I accept that might be uncharitable in the way that the press have ran with it but this is what people will see from the outside of the party. If it's not in favour of either Israelis or Palestinians, a single democratic state is just the status quo with a better government but the chances of that happening are slim. The more realistic solution is a two-state solution; a one state solution expels or genocides a group of people, inevitably, unless somehow both groups of people can agree to unify under one name and banner, which seems even less realistic. It can just never happen with Israeli governments like the current one in power. Maybe it could have happened 30 years ago, sadly we're further away from that point now.

And yeah, it's true that the media have run with this over and above the rest of the messaging from the conference, which largely seems very good (I do like Polanski and his speech was great), but they need to be aware that this is what the UK media does.

Quite right Jacob.

Besides that this whole projection of Israel and Palestine as a primary issue for British voters feels, dare I say, very online bubble?

Irl most people I know at best have some vague compassion and low knowledge, rather than strong opinions either way. The only thing most people know culturally is that antisemitism is bad (or maybe even 'the worst' thing to be out of racism etc. given its outsize media coverage) and now here are the Green party, a party that defenders said was only pro Human Rights, now claiming that the same group the Nazis (helpfully also conflated as socialist to the GP) didn't deserve human rights, don't deserve human rights.

What an own goal.

9 hours ago, J00prstar said:

Quite right Jacob.

Besides that this whole projection of Israel and Palestine as a primary issue for British voters feels, dare I say, very online bubble?

Irl most people I know at best have some vague compassion and low knowledge, rather than strong opinions either way. The only thing most people know culturally is that antisemitism is bad (or maybe even 'the worst' thing to be out of racism etc. given its outsize media coverage) and now here are the Green party, a party that defenders said was only pro Human Rights, now claiming that the same group the Nazis (helpfully also conflated as socialist to the GP) didn't deserve human rights, don't deserve human rights.

What an own goal.

I think the reason is the moral position and politically the core Green voters are in big cities and the young this is a big issue.

42 minutes ago, Steve201 said:

I think the reason is the moral position and politically the core Green voters are in big cities and the young this is a big issue.

I did wonder. I don't have the perspective - I don't know anyone that young or activisty.

16 hours ago, Rooney said:

A position aligned with discrimination no matter how the PR team within the Party try and explain it. Not sure that helps the debate, if anything it has the opposite effect in my view.

Discrimination?

16 minutes ago, Steve201 said:

Discrimination?

Yes, zionism = racism is discriminatority.

I mean you only need to look at the news that has come out today about the intentions, no matter how people here argue about semantics and PR. It's not a good look. The by-election odds have dropped like a stone for the Greens. Like I said, pretty clear Polanski will no longer be leader very shortly.