British journalist Jake Wallis Simons discusses the epidemic of antisemitism in Great Britain, including the surging support for the Green Party, which despite its name is less about environmentalism and more about the putative sins of Israel and, by extension, “the Jews”:
It is impossible to imagine a political party built around loathing for black people attracting any meaningful support in Britain. Today, however, as the results of the local elections come in, it is clear that the same is not true for the Jews.
I speak, of course, of the Green Party, that deplorable alliance of hard-left fanatics and Islamists that has seduced up to 20 per cent of the vote, or nine million people, according to recent polls. Reform’s stonking success may be stealing the headlines but the Greens are performing strongly, and on current trends, this is only the beginning.
Clearly, the evil genius that is Zack Polanski has found a winning formula. It is a plan based not on policy but prejudice. He is a master of social media, the king of the soft exterior which he uses to seduce a public with little attention to detail.
Polanski knows the game because he understands the shallowness of his audience. It is this mass dullness, this susceptibility to propaganda, this narcissistic tribalism, this lamentable lack of curiosity that lies behind the rise of the most racist party in British political history.
Because running through all this is the animal spirit of antisemitism. I’d hazard a guess that Green voters aren’t attracted by policies such as legalising heroin or creating a “world without borders”. Give them a way to express their loathing of Israel at the ballot box, however, and they’re right behind you….
Muslim fanatics murdering Jews in London and Manchester, anti-Israel mobs on the streets who call for the destruction of Israel (“from the river to the sea/Palestine will be free”), and for attacks on Jews everywhere (“globalize the Intifada”), the shouting down of pro-Israel speakers, the pro-Hamas student protesters harassing and attacking Jewish classmates on campus are all the evidence one needs of antisemitism, both causing, and caused by, anti-Israel animus.
And now we have the local elections on May 7, when the Green Party, with the antisemitic statements of many of its candidates recently publicized in a Labour Party campaign ad intended to lessen the party’s support, did not suffer one whit, but instead managed to win hundreds of new seats. Starmer was too weak to deal with this matter; he’s on his way out, but will his replacement do any better in making the fight against antisemitism a priority?
Wellington says
Faux environmentalism, as opposed to realistic concerns for the environment, invariably comes with a lot of unnecessary and foolish baggage. One such example is being inveterately opposed to the very existence of Israel—and by extension to Jews en masse. Another is historically indefensible sympathy for the so-called Palestinians. And yet another is the demonizing of fossil fuels, never mind the waste and uselessness of so-called green energy all the while fossil fuel use has gone up in efficiency and cleanliness exponentially in the past half century (e.g., liquid coal).
Well, you find these environmental fanatics and losers virtually without exception on just one side of the political spectrum. As usual, the Left gets things terribly wrong. Indeed, when has the Left ever got something correct? So, why would anyone but a fool be a Leftist? Unfortunately, a good portion of the human race is mired in foolishness.
Rarely says
Hugh,
The UK has “become” a racist nation??
When its history has Britain not been racist?
Perhaps its more racist today than in some of its past and perhaps not always as overtly so as some of its European counterparts but never without racism or bigotry.
Wellington says
When has any society not been racist? Can you name one.
In the Meantime—a big Meantime here— it was Britain that put an end to the slave trade in 1808 and to slavery in 1833 throughout its empire. Thereafter, it did all it could to end the Atlantic slave trade, even to the extent of using about 20% of the entire British fleet to do so and at the cost of over 1500 British sailors’ lives, as chronicled by many, including by Douglas Murray in his recent work, The War on the West. Britain also used its army to end slavery, cannibalism and human sacrifice in Africa, in places like modern Ghana and Sudan.
So tired of only Western Civilization being blamed for racism, slavery, et al. when, in fact, every civilization and society are equally as guilty, if not more. Ask yourself when has the Asian world, the American Indian world, the Islamic world, the sub-Saharan African world been called upon to make amends and apologies for their wrongdoings. Yes, when?
Rarely says
The topic is UK racism/bigotry. Don’t try to change the subject. Certainly racism/bigotry is/was universal but, in any event, it isn’t new to the UK To end slavery you had to have slavery in the first place.
Wellington says
I didn’t change the subject, not really, only pointed out that racism and lots of other bigotry is not unique to the West though it seems only the West is called out on such even though the West has done more to end bigotry of all sorts than any other civilization or society on Earth.
Eddie says
Who started slavery ?
Was it the British ?
I always thought slavery itself was pretty universal.
gravenimage says
True, Eddie. Britain was one of the first places to *abolish* slavery.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Wellington
I am w/ Rarely on this one. Yes, all countries may be racist to varying degrees, but Britain was the one that exported that racism via colonialism on a scale unmatched by any other European country, except France and Spain
But what’s worse was that Britain used that power to escalate the power of islam, or salvage it from being completely decimated, like in Central and South Asia in the 19th century. They destroyed a major Sikh kingdom in Punjab and from a long term observation, made inevitable the creation of Pakistan. Their colonization of India happened to coincide w/ the disintegration of the Mughal empire and its replacement by the Hindu Maratha empire, contrary to the belief that they ended the Mughal empire. All that was done in their game of one-upsmanship against Russia, when Tsar Nikolai I was just trying to get Russia recognized as the protector of Christians in the Ottoman empire, most of who were Orthodox and not Protestant
There was also Thomas Edward Lawrence and his weird fascination w/ the Arabs (hence his name “Lawrence of Arabia”), and that weird Sykes-Picot line used to carve up Arab territory b/w Britain & France, which left the Kurds, Assyrians, Maronites, Melkites in untenable situations. Yeah, there is much to condemn about British racism w/o sounding like a full retarded Leftist
Wellington says
Infidel: Paul Johnson in his work, Modern Times, maintains that the British in India kept Hindus and Muslims from tearing each other apart and that Gandhi naively thought that once the British left Hindus and Muslims would live in peace. It was only once the British were gone that the real killing began and which tends to validate Johnson’s thesis. There is also the matter of much killing and slaughter in the Subcontinent long before the British ever arrived. I don’t deny that the British thought themselves superior (and not just with non-whites but with the French, Germans, even the Americans) but what people have not thought themselves superior? The Sioux in their language called themselves “the human beings,” the implication being that everyone else was less than fully human. The ancient Egyptians looked upon themselves as the center of the world as did the Chinese. The Japanese from time immemorial thought of themselves as the one divine people on Earth. The ancient Greeks called all those who were not Greek barbarians because all non-Greeks sounded like sheep going “bah, bah.” And so on. Yes, because the British Empire was so powerful and extensive, Britain’s high opinion of itself was exported throughout its empire but many, myself included, have maintained that whatever faults the British Empire had it was still the most decent empire in history and carried in its imperial knapsack the seeds of democracy for those who could effectively plant such seeds well and thereafter water and nurture them.
On the matter of Nicholas I, I will give him the benefit of the doubt that he was sincere in wanting to protect Christians in the Ottoman Empire but his chief goal was access to the Straits and the dissolution of “the sick man of Europe.” Britain understood this all too well and, from a British perspective, had to oppose this. So much of 19th century history can be understood in geopolitical terms respecting the British wanting to deny Russia warm waters ports. This very goal has been carried on to the present time with America replacing Britain here.
Finally, I agree with you about the screw-up by Britain post WWI with respect to the carving up of the Ottoman Empire but off hand I can’t think of any solution that would have really worked. As for Lawrence, as much as I think the film, “Lawrence of Arabia,” is a masterpiece of filmmaking, it portrayed Lawrence as way too conflicted between being British and any pan-Arab sentiments he had. In reality, Lawrence was a hard-headed Brit who thought that the Arabs needed to be treated like children—with affection, yes, but like children nonetheless. Lawrence was also a full Zionist.
࿗Infidel࿘ says
Okay, so that’s quite a bit you put out there, but just for the time being, I’ll grant you the notion that every group of people thought themselves to be superior to everyone else – I thought I had allowed for that above. But let’s get to the other 2 points
⮞ On Paul Johnson’s point that Hindus & muslims were at each other’s throats, the history of the subcontinent b/w the disintegration of the Mughals and the arrival of the British is pretty well documented, and even somewhat protracted. But the population of India, which is 15% today, wasn’t much higher even then, which is why the Mughals and others had to import muslims from Central Asia and Iran to fill their ranks. Also, Hindu-muslim relations in the subcontinent were more stable under the Marathas, since muslims knew where they stood and didn’t do the sort of things that, for example, they do today in Britain and Europe. In fact, until the arrival of Gandhi, Hindus pretty much despised muslims, and didn’t look at them as another religion, the way we do today both in the West as well as in the East: they saw them as barbarians and kept them away from them. It was Gandhi who normalized them in the first place: Hindu-muslim relations in the 19th century was nothing like what it was after the 1920s, when Gandhi started gaining prominence
⮞ On Lawrence of Arabia, I have read books about him that were published long before the current multicultural romanticization of islam/Arabs, and he, during his mission to support the Arabs in their uprising against the Ottomans, was completely carried away and was disgusted by Sykes-Picot: he had hoped for an Arab empire from the Levant to Arabia (I’m not sure whether Egypt, Sudan, Libya… would have been a part of all this). There is nothing to indicate that he was a Zionist: his sympathies on that one was clearly w/ the Arabs. While he may have been condescending towards the Arabs in regarding them as children, it’s clear that he supported them, and was disgusted w/ the Brits & the French for carving up Arab territories after the war
⮞ Sykes-Picot was an artificial redrawing of the map in ways it never existed. There was no factoring of the native ethnic divisions b/w Arabs, Kurds, Druze, Assyrians, Chaldeans, Maronites, Melki’ites, Alawites and so on. For instance, Syria, the way it was defined then, was just another term for the Levant, and included Phoenicia, Palestine i.e. everything b/w the Euphrates and the Mediterranean Sea. Had they drawn maps for every ethnic group, rather than just carve things out b/w themselves, things would have been a lot better
⮞ On the Russians, you prove my point that the Brits were so deranged that they decided to empower the muslims – Ottomans in Turkey, and the shahs of Iran & Afghanistan in Central Asia – to contain the Russians. Until the Crimean War, the Brits hardly had any contact w/ the Russians, unlike in mainland Europe where they had alliances and wars at different times w/ the French, Dutch, Prussians, Austrians, Spaniards, Portuguese, et al. There was no reason to try to deny the Russians warm water ports in either the Mediterranean Sea or the Arabian Sea: Russia was nowhere near Britain. Part of it was their imperialist impulses, which I grant you that they were not alone, but the worse one was their pro-islamic impulses
The best demonstration of my last argument would be an experiment comparing a few central Asian cities which were once more often then not under the same islamic empires – Samarqand, Buqhara, Merw, Nishapur, Mashhed, Herat and Balkh. All of these cities are today in different countries – Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Iran and Afghanistan.
Of these, the Russians, in response to Turkic raids on their frontiers that took Russians as slaves to be sold in slave markets in Buqhara and Xeva. In response to that, the Romanovs sent armies into Central Asia, abolished those Khanates and annexed them. The Soviets over 70 years completely destroyed islam in that region – the one good thing they ever did
Today, if one is a Western tourist, one can safely visit Uzbekistan. Turkmenistan is a country as isolated as North Korea, but even there, islam has been bowdlerized. Both of these countries are results of Russian – both Romanovsk and Soviet – re-engineering of their countries, but relatively safe for non-muslims. As a result, a non-muslim tourist would be pretty safe visiting, for instance, Uzbekistan today, but he’d have to be out of his mind if he wanted to visit Afghanistan or Iran
Contrast those 2 w/ Afghanistan and Iran, both of which were saved by the Brits from falling to the Russians, and then tell me which of these powers did a better job wrt islam – Britain or Russia?
Wellington says
Infidel; A lot to unpack here:
Respecting India, my overall point has been that slaughter and prejudice existed before the British, during British rule and after British rule. We do agree on how much Gandhi screwed things up. He remains my choice for the single most overrated person of the 20th century.
Respecting Lawrence of Arabia, he was most definitely full Zionist. It was his conviction that the Jews would greatly aid the development of the Middle East. Moreover, he had had a long admiration for the Jews. A well known quote of his is “the everlasting miracle of Jewry.” As noted in Martin Gilbert’s biography of Winston Churchill, Lawrence said the following in 1918 to a Jewish newspaper: “Speaking entirely as a non-Jew, I am decidedly in favor of Zionism, indeed I look on the Jew as the natural importers of western leaven so necessary for countries in the Near East.” He was good friends with Chaim Weizmann and was keenly involved in the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement of 1919. Finding additional support for Lawrence’s Zionistic inclinations is actually quite easy, including by just asking AI.
On the matter of drawing maps for every ethnic group, this is exactly what Woodrow Wilson wanted with Europe and he largely got it, but as many have noted, including Paul Johnson in Modern Times, this led to petty bickering and all kinds of problems between Czechs, Poles, Hungarians, Slovaks, Serbs, Croatians, etc. Yes, the Sykes-Picot approach didn’t work but my point is that nothing would have. After all, we’re talking about the Middle East here.
The Brits were not deranged where Russia was concerned, they were “only” engaging in Realpolitik. By the 19th century, Russia and Britain were significant rivals. Britain was concerned about Russian ambition southwards, both to the Mediterranean and towards India. It was all part of the Great Game. Britain understandably was concerned about a Russia in Mediterranean waters, especially once Britain had acquired effective ownership of the Suez Canal. A powerful Russian naval presence in the eastern Mediterranean could pose a menace to smooth commerce from Europe to India via the Canal. Was Britain a bit short-sighted in going with the Turks? Perhaps. But you do the best you can at the time. A classic example is aligning with Stalin to defeat Hitler.
I concede your point about the Russians historically handling Muslims better than the Brits. The authoritarian nature of the Russians which persists to this day is lousy for democracy but sometimes good for order.
Thank you for you views. I always welcome them. Take care.
ploome says
is Jew now a race?
CHEVELLE says
This Green Party is led by Jews. So I don’t really get it. A bunch of younger Jews as well are rolling with this party, and praising Muslims non stop.
Look at here, the Jews keep voting democrats. But democrats hate them. Them jewskis love them some Rashida talab up in metro Detroit.
Kepha says
This Jewish leadership of the Greens (and their role with the Reds before) is a prime example of a good thing being corrupted. This being said, I freely recognize that these radicals are only a segment of the Jewish population and, very lamentably, are greatly outnumbered by post-Christian adherents to these corrupt causes.
The good thing is a spirit of self-criticism. Read the Prophets of Israel in the Old Testament–a shared heritage of both Jews and Christians. They long ago convinced me that the true origin of the West’s self-criticism lies not in Athens, but Jerusalem (the chronology fits). This self-critical spirit has informed a lot of Western history from the Renaissance humanists and Protestant reformers onwards–and includes Wilberforce and his Clapham Sect in their struggle against slavery and for a number of other worthwhile reforms.
But whereas Jeremiah (and Jesus the Messiah) wept over a Jerusalem whose downfall they predicted (and looked towards and offered its redemption), the modern radicals, whether Green or Communist, want only self-destruction.
carpediadem says
They’re born Jews but become Leftists with internalised Jewhatred.
Rarely says
CHEVELLE.
Jews are involved in virtually every political and social movement. As are Christians. Those self-hating Christians should be ashamed of themselves.
BTW. I don’t think you’re going to find very many Jews “praising Muslims non stop”.
You come awfully close to blaming “the” Jews for the existence of the Green Party after all they’re too busy controlling World finance aren’t they?
Rarely says
BTW.
Why is it so difficult to see a Jewish person as acting on his/her own and not as a representative of a larger Jewish group with, presumably, some ulterior motive?
Wasn’t Hitler a Catholic? Would that then make Naziism a Catholic plot?
CHEVELLE says
They’re all democrats and liberals, idiots marching to their own demise.
I am asking at what point should I feel bad for antisemitism, if they vote for it?
I’m about ready to let the Muslims take them, 80 percent vote democrats.
Exception, Israel.
ploome says
antisemitism? Awesome article
The Jew-Hatred Pandemic No Longer a Mystery
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2026/05/the_jew_hatred_pandemic_no_longer_a_mystery.html
gravenimage says
Thanks for that link.
abu taleb says
Green is the color of Islam
Kepha says
This Jewish leadership of the Greens (and their role with the Reds before) is a prime example of a good thing being corrupted. This being said, I freely recognize that these radicals are only a segment of the Jewish population and, very lamentably, are greatly outnumbered by post-Christian adherents to these corrupt causes.
The good thing is a spirit of self-criticism. Read the Prophets of Israel in the Old Testament–a shared heritage of both Jews and Christians. They long ago convinced me that the true origin of the West’s self-criticism lies not in Athens, but Jerusalem (the chronology fits). This self-critical spirit has informed a lot of Western history from the Renaissance humanists and Protestant reformers onwards–and includes Wilberforce and his Clapham Sect in their struggle against slavery and for a number of other worthwhile reforms.
But whereas Jeremiah (and Jesus the Messiah) wept over a Jerusalem whose downfall they predicted (and looked towards and offered its redemption), the modern radicals, whether Green or Communist, want only self-destruction.
Eddie says
Actually the UK IS getting more racist every day.
Not in the manner suggested by this article but in more general terms.
If “racist” s the correct term for British people being sick to death of the foreigners who destroying and degrading our country and replacing the native population.
So we are seeing a definite swing of groundswell public opinion to the right and it is sweeping the whole country.
Our people have had enough.
We have a new political party, “Restore Britain” under Rupert Lowe MP and we intend to take our country back.
It’s purpose is to put the native population FIRST as we should be.
And if we fail, we shall, as Roosevelt we said do so “while daring greatly ”
So call us what you like. As our Rupert says:
WE DON’T CARE.
That feels sooooo good to say that.
Beans🫘 says
I’m not dawging on your comment. But I would like to add this. You may be putting yourself into a corner with this.
My view is that most of Britain will side with British Muslims over your camp if push comes to shove.
Look at the demographics. You need 51 percent on your side. You have to win half the whites and it’s still not enough. No way you can pull white British women into your camp in a majority, they will protect the Muslims push comes to shove, the media will destroy you guys, the globalists will sabotage the economy.
More Muslims are coming than ever. And legally, they’re flooding you through legal means, along with the boats. I hear you’re attracting seriously sick people who want expensive care for cancers, aids, hiv. It’s cheaper to come there, and many actually have good lives back home to afford the journey. They want to mooch, and bleed the system.
Best of luck, and be careful not to push too far in commenting, the censors are aggressive there.
somehistory says
“The Bandit of Zhobe.” a movie about the Brits and the muzzies. Couldn’t make such a movie today.
gravenimage says
The UK Has Become a Racist Nation
………………………………….
Chilling stuff. And
I have Jewish inlaws in Britain.