Green Party's "Zionism is Racism" Motion Collapses: Which Race Are They Protecting?
When your anti-racism motion requires identifying a race - and you won't.
Right. Let me ask you something simple.
The Green Party just passed a motion declaring “Zionism is a form of racism.” Telegraph reported it today, February 14th, alongside calls to defund police.
So here’s my question: Which race?
You see, racism requires race. It’s in the bloody word. So which racial category are we protecting?
Is it the Jewish race? Won’t be that - they’ll scream antisemitism. “Not all Jews are Zionists!” True. You can be Jewish and anti-Zionist, Christian and Zionist, atheist and Zionist. So if Zionism isn’t exclusively Jewish, it fails as racism against Jews.
Israeli race? Doesn’t exist. Israel’s population includes twenty-three recognised ethnic groups - Jews, Muslim Arabs, Christian Arabs, Druze, Bedouins, Circassians. If you think “Israeli” is a race, you’ve confused citizenship with genetics.
Palestinian race? Also doesn’t exist. Palestinians are Levantine Arabs, same as Syrians, Lebanese, Jordanians. Same genetic stock, different national identities.
Semitic race? Now we’re in 19th-century phrenology everyone abandoned around 1945. “Semitic” describes language families, not races.
Look, they’ve built a syllogism that collapses under basic logic. Declared Zionism is racism. Racism requires race. Refuse to identify which. Therefore the entire motion is semantic bollocks.
But here’s where it gets entertaining.
Cold War Propaganda Nobody Fact-Checked.
This phrase is lifted wholesale from UN General Assembly Resolution 3379, passed November 10th, 1975, declaring Zionism “a form of racism and racial discrimination.”
It stood sixteen years. Then on December 16th, 1991, the UN revoked it - one of only two General Assembly resolutions ever formally rescinded. Even the institution that birthed this semantic disaster admitted it was intellectually indefensible.
But activists in 2026 have resurrected what the United Nations abandoned thirty-five years ago.
Apply the three questions:
Is it practical? Look, try operationalising racism without identifying which race you’re protecting. Take that to an employment tribunal. “Your Honour, my client suffered racism.” “Against which protected characteristic?” “We’re not specifying.” Case dismissed.
Is it logical? If Zionism is racism, it must assert one race’s superiority over another. But Jews aren’t a race - they’re an ethnoreligious group spanning every continent. The logical chain disintegrates when you demand specificity.
What’s the likely outcome? Internal whistleblowers reporting colleagues to counter-terrorism police. Jewish organisations condemning the party. Media framing Greens as extremist. Electoral damage. Factional warfare. And for Palestinians? Zero material improvement - no houses built, no water provided, no peace negotiated.
Who benefits? Not Palestinians. Not Jewish members watching their party echo antisemitic tropes. Not leadership facing police reports from their own members.
Just activists feeling morally superior while achieving nothing. Professional activism’s perfect cause - endless grandstanding without requiring policy expertise, measurable outcomes, or functioning brain cells apparently. Not when moral outrage serves a purpose and people feel better about themselves.
Weaponising Anti-Racism Language.
Look, they genuinely believe they’re fighting racism. But they’re packaging a geopolitical stance inside anti-racism rhetoric.
Here’s the thing - racism has a definition. Slapping it onto political positions you dislike degrades the concept until it means nothing.
If Zionism is racist, what about Kurdish nationalism? Catalan independence? Scottish self-determination? Are all nationalist movements inherently racist? If not, what makes Zionism uniquely so?
You won’t get answers. This isn’t about racism. It’s about Israel’s policies. Rather than argue their position directly, they’ve smuggled it inside anti-racism language to claim moral high ground they haven’t earned.
They’re colonising anti-racism terminology for geopolitical positioning. When everything becomes racism, nothing is.
What’s being left unsaid? This achieves nothing for Palestinians. Doesn’t feed, house, protect, heal anyone. Virtue theatre for British activists feeling righteous about a conflict 2,000 miles away they have zero power to influence.
The Professional Activist’s Infinite Cause.
This isn’t about Palestine. This is about discovering Middle Eastern conflict provides endless moral grandstanding without requiring expertise, outcomes, or metrics.
Membership’s grown to 190,000 - former Labour refugees fleeing after Corbyn. Not joining to discuss transport policy. They’re continuing battles they already lost.
First thing they do? Import the exact conflicts that destroyed Labour’s credibility. Same antisemitism accusations. Same factional warfare. Same Middle Eastern obsession over domestic policy.
This is ‘Groundhog Day’ in Green rosettes.
Institutional Capture in Action.
Here’s what’s happening - a party founded on climate change and ecological sustainability gets captured by activists obsessed with Middle Eastern geopolitics.
Small, motivated faction enters organisation. Pushes motions. Dominates forums. Frames opposition as moral failure. Shifts entire mission toward their obsessions.
Listen, they should be dominating conversations on net zero targets, insulation programmes, public transport, rewilding, river pollution, air quality, sustainable housing. Their issues. Their expertise. Their electoral advantage.
Instead, debating whether Zionism is racism while leadership handles counter-terrorism police reports.
Give me a party with weak leadership, ideological activists from failed movements, processes rewarding motivated minorities, moral language framing dissent as bigotry, no electoral pressure forcing pragmatism - and I’ll predict the outcome: consumed by warfare, purity tests, symbolic motions alienating voters.
They’re speedrunning Labour’s Corbyn-era collapse. Same script, different actors, predictable ending.
Bristol Knows This Script.
Look, I recognise this pattern documenting Bristol City Council’s Green-led administration.
Promised affordable housing. Sold 1,222 council homes while building fewer than promised. Implemented transport schemes despite 54% resident opposition. Stonewalled FOI requests until ICO enforcement notices.
When challenged? Deflect. Frame opposition as climate complicity. Claim resource constraints. Attack critics’ motives.
National party deploys exactly the same playbook: Declare Zionism racist. Frame opposition as genocide complicity. Attack critics. Produce zero outcomes.
Different scale. Same dysfunction. Same capture prioritising virtue signalling over governing competence.
Back to That Simple Question.
So - if Zionism is racism, which race are they protecting?
Still no answer.
Here’s why. Because this was never about racism. Never about protecting specific groups from discrimination. Never about consistent anti-racist analysis.
Just importing Cold War propaganda to signal virtue while producing zero material outcomes for Palestinians whose lives they claim to care about.
Performative politics masquerading as anti-racism. Semantic vandalism pretending to be moral clarity. Factional capture disguised as progressive policy.
Destroying the party from inside, exactly as it destroyed Labour under Corbyn, exactly as it will destroy any institution letting activist factions prioritise purity spirals over strategy.
The question remains unanswered.
Because there is no answer.
Because the motion is nonsense.
Grammatically structured. Semantically vacant. Politically toxic.
Just like the institutions promoting it.