That Corbyn speech

I thought his speech, fluffs and missteps and all, was really pretty good. It was curious in the extreme to see someone in this age present such an unpolished performance, but one which worked because it was so heartfelt. Remember Ed Miliband jumping through hoops like a performing political dog, having to memorise vast chunks of text and for what? Only to forget some and leave a great gaping hole for his opponents. Madness on so many levels. Whereas Corbyn, a man who is benefiting from the absurdly low expectations of a media displaying an almost parodic antagonism to him, cruises through at a steady rate of knots. Spectacular? No. Adequate? More than adequate.

Corbyn is less radical than you or me (most likely) by quite some distance – at least in this incarnation. Nationalisation? Surely, the no-brainer of taking British Rail back into public ownership. But the Royal Mail? Perhaps his instincts are for that, but there’s little to indicate an appetite at this point. It may come.

And look at Trident and NATO. Already there’s a push-back inside the LP. Simply put too many inside the LP support the former and the latter is in some respects regarded as inviolable. It seems all too likely that he may find himself outnumbered on Trident throughout his leadership.

That sentiment more broadly and within the BLP cannot be wished away. To be honest I think NATO withdrawal is unwinnable on any realistic timeframe, whatever about Trident. And the attachment to Trident is bizarre given its actual utility – or indeed the curiosity of it being an US weapons delivery system with all that that implies. One has to wonder whether the US would permit its use independent of their
imprimatur. If I was the US I’d be keen to ensure that even a trusted proxy such as the UK wasn’t given too much autonomy in regard to them.

There’s the irony in all this. In some respects Corbyn, in relation to US interests is arguably, given his disinclination to use the weapons, much more congenial to them, not that they’d ever admit it – the problem is, though,  he is all too willing to say so to others.

But all of that is for another day, what’s still remarkable is the dog in a manger tone of the reporting – the Guardian in particular is notable for it. But I’m wondering if that’s actually working to his advantage. One thing seems reasonably certain, if it were a Burnham or a Cooper up there this week there’d have been nothing like this level of interest.