Why The Greens and Reform Are Cousins
The Green Party and Reform are cousins. Perhaps even closer. Different sides on the same coin.
The “rise of self” amplified within the political spotlight.
There is a core structural parallel between the two: both are “disruptor” brands that rely on a personality-led “I” narrative to mask the lack of a traditional, robust party machine.
Listen to both Zack Polanksi and Nigel Farage speak. They overly rely on the use of an “I narrative”. “I think, believe, know” - as a personal translation much removed from the underling party mechanics they represent.
This creates a specific “authenticity gap” between speaker and party and often between speaker and audience.
1. The “I” as a Strategic Shortcut
In both the Green Party under Polanski and Reform UK under Farage, the leader becomes the singular avatar for their respective movement.
The Narrative: “I am the one telling you the truth that the ‘establishment’ won’t.”
The Consequence: This creates a competence bottleneck. Because the strategy is so leader-centric, the party’s success depends on the leader’s “performance” rather than the depth of their cabinet or the feasibility of their governance model.
2. Anti-Establishment vs. Alternative Structure
Both parties are highly effective at critique but are vague on the alternative political structure.
The Green Strategy: Focuses on “System Change,” but often struggles to explain how a de-centralised, committee-led party (their official structure) functions when led by a highly centralised, “manic” communicator using NLP techniques. He’s a former hypnotherapist apparently with a BA degree in drama. Useful I imagine.
The Reform Strategy: Focuses on “Breaking the Model,” yet remains a “limited company” structure rather than a traditional democratic party.
The Result: A lack of trust. Voters sense that the “alternative” is just a different flavour of top-down control, re-branded as “insurgency.”
3. The Discrepancy in Authenticity
This leads to the authenticity paradox:
Zack Polanski: Uses professional drama and hypnotherapy training to simulate a connection with the “common man.” Watch him with the volume turned off.
Nigel Farage: Uses a carefully curated “pint-and-fag” persona to simulate a connection with the working class. (By the way, who today as the working class?)
The Friction: When a voter sees the “mask” slip—whether it’s Polanski’s “manic” intensity or Farage’s elite background—it reinforces the idea that the party is self-serving and more interested in the theatre of power than the un-glamorous work of constituent service.
4. Tactical Convergence
The 2026 Gorton and Denton by-election proved they are two sides of the same coin. Both used “negative partisanship”—campaigning more on why Labour (and lesser extent the Tories) are “broken” than on how they would actually manage a treasury or a local council. This populist framework allows them to bypass the “academic reasoning” in favour of high-energy, emotive storytelling.
Ultimately, both parties operate as marketing engines for a specific worldview, led by individuals whose primary qualification is communication management rather than systemic design.
Two sides of the complaining-coin, offering nothing remotely close to establishing a political strategy alternative to what is currently not working.