Quote Originally Posted by Seamus Fermanagh View Post
So...

Labour is, at the moment, led by someone who is a true communard (thus appealing to the party's emotional 'heart' and unionists-to-the-barricades roots) but who cannot seem to function well as an executive, while the other leadership contenders are probably more competent at the affairs of governance but seem "tainted" by right-wing attitudes or alliances and thus unappealing to a large portion of the labour voting base. All of which is confounded by being supported by a minority of the voters at large and with few prospects for establishing a coalition government with one of the other parties.

Is that an accurate summary of the current state of things?
Labour is led by someone who has cultivated ties with all the ideological causes of the non-mainstream Left. These causes often conflict with each other, but they have the common theme of despising compromise and the centre. The latter is personified by Tony Blair, who made alliances with people whom the ideological Left loathe, and who appealed to the centre. Corbyn's leadership shtick is that he is everything Blair isn't. This appeals to his supporters. Unfortunately, there's a reason why Blair won 3 elections, including two of the largest majorities in British history.

And for Beskar: Blair's government did more to help the vulnerable than any other government in my life time. I am deeply appreciative of the things his government did, as my other experience of British government is Tory to greater and lesser extents. Corbyn's supporters despise Blair's government, describing them as no different from the Tories. I strongly, strongly disagree, especially given the pedigree of the man they support instead. Corbyn entered Parliament in the same election where Blair was first elected as MP. What has Corbyn done in this 30-odd years as MP? Does it compare with what Blair has done? Why should I hate Blair?