Alfie P – LVI
On the 2nd of November 1982 in Salford Greater Manchester David Paulden was born, or as we now know him, Zack Polanski. A drama loving Stockport Grammar School pupil who changed his name at the young age of 18 to adopt his Grandfather’s original surname as a way to connect to his Jewish heritage. Polanski worked as an actor in immersive theatre before emerging into his first political role with the Liberal Democrats, standing as a candidate in the 2015 local council election. He switched to the Green Party in 2017 after being inspired by their stance on refugees and environmental issues of our world, becoming the leader of the Green Party in September 2025 of England and Wales, winning by a landslide in the membership vote.
Before scrutinising populism it’s key to understand it – this is a political approach which in its simplest form divides society into two groups : “The people” being ordinary citizens who are seen as honest, hard-working, ignored, and “The elite” being politicians, institutions or wealthy groups accused of being corrupt or out of touch. Polanski more specifically describes his political approach as “eco-populism” which combines environmental concerns with social economics and populist messaging techniques. His platform centers on wealth taxation and climate action funded by taxing the wealthy rather than ordinary consumers, alongside confronting Reform UK’s narrative, highlighting his obsession with challenging Nigel Farage directly.
To follow this, Polanski has driven the “us-versus-them” narrative throughout his leadership by consistently highlighting the millionaires and billionaires of our world as “villains” who dare to say they don’t want to pay more tax when this country is crumbling. His repeated mantra of denouncing the wealthy individuals of our country is seen to be his solution to all problems, describing them as “morally reprehensible.” The irony behind his bold slander of the wealthy and powerful is laid firmly within his background, the then David Paulden attended a fee paying senior school charging approximately £5,000 a term (not including the probability of him having extra curricular support through his love for drama). In addition, Zack currently works as a London Assembly member (not a manual laborer) and his previous careers include a brief stint in hypnotherapy alongside acting. All of which make it hard to get behind his rhetoric due to his fundamental Green Party imposter background.
Therefore if Polanski continues to adopt this populist approach in his campaigns, it could culminate in extremist behaviour and outcomes, which in the end could turn nasty for the world. Negative issues evolve in our world when people take no opportunity to compromise or to assess underlying facts as opposed to driving their mindset, as we have seen in previous years. This coincides well with the possibility of emotion dominating the Green Party’s mindset over facts with members turning to anger rather than expertise. If this continues to happen, with the small possibility that Polanski does gain any form of power within the government (hopefully not), we can see a large risk of democracy being undermined in a number of ways. If court independence is lost, giving politicians more control over judges; increasing conflict with the EU if their EU legal standards are defied, risking economic penalties and isolation; finally, the complete ignorance of law, adopting the mindset of changing laws to suit, rather than using the democratic checks currently in place.
Ultimately the future of Zach Polanski’s populism, more specifically eco-populism, depends significantly on its practical credibility. As much as it seems an extremely exciting idea for those Green Party members who feel sidelined by the political spectrum and constantly put down, overall what is ignored is its requirement of basic compromise, detail and realistic planning. British voters in the past have been uncomfortable with leaders who rely too much on moral attacks rather than balanced policies especially during a time of economic uncertainty. If Polanski continues to create enemies through his debate, rather than show the effectiveness of his populism, he will never create a credible political debate for his populism movement to gain wider traction. This therefore suggests that Polanski’s populism may not be the future of British politics but a reaction to the problems people feel right now, making it extremely dangerous if given the right voice.