Why do some people think Corbyn was a ‘terrifying prospect’?

[StillCuriouser]

Taking a quote from a comment made on another thread.

I am not massively engaged in politics, but from what I understand Corbyn was pro-environment, pro-public services and re-nationalisation, he was a man who lived according to his own values.
He was laughed at for riding a bike and making jam. He was accused of being anti-semitic, though I didn't see any persuasive evidence of this, and- though not wanting to engage in whataboutery- Johnson’s awful racist remarks didn’t prevent him from gaining power.

I understand that people will have disagreed with him in policy. But what about him was did people feel was “terrifying” and so beyond the pale?
If Boris was electable and Corbyn was not I feel there must be something horrific about Corbyn that I am missing?

43% voted Conservative. 57% didn't trust Boris Johnson.

It became a Brexit election and Labour fell into a massive trap.

Corbyn's children went to grammar and then private school but his wife had to divorce him in order to force either to happen. Now you may or may not think that's Ok behaviour, but it definitely doesn't make him a hypocrite.

I can't imagine that a labour government led by Corbin would have been worse than this shower domestically, but I did have serious reservations about his international policy. In particular I'm a big fan of NATO and he's strongly opposed and is perpetrating a "faults on both sides" view of the Ukraine conflict.

When Michael Foot was Labour leader he supported the war to retake the Falkland Islands, and his reason was "I know a fascist when I see one". Corbyn by contrast opposed it because he thought it was a Tory plot. I don't think he knows a fascist when he sees one.

People have been brainwashed over the last 4 decades into thinking that only private companies can make public services work, that greed is the only social value, and that exploitation and aggression towards others are the only possible ways society can be made to work. The very possibility of any alternatives to this broken hell hole cannot be raised now. We lack the ability to even discuss it.

Like you I can see that this extreme form of private capitalism has failed, as it has done so many times before.

I believe he talked with Sinn Fein and Palestine, as he talked with other people.
Boris Johnson has been 'friendly' with Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump and Berlsoconi n the past, but that is missing from the comparison.

As for JC not singing the National Anthem, so what? He hasnt told anyone else not to or banned them from doing so. Its a hymn to a monarch, not a celebration of a nation. Apart from lauding someone with immense privilege, the entire version needs some serious revision with its talk of crushing the Scots.

I'm a big fan of NATO and he's strongly opposed and is perpetrating a "faults on both sides" view of the Ukraine conflict.

Both are bad but the NATO part is particularly so

@JustAnotherPoster00 Open a dictionary and look up the word 'deterrent '.. worked for over 75 years so far.

His response to the Salisbury nerve agent attack means I’m very pleased he’s not leading the country through the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Because England is Tory to its bones because of our history.

His light touch leadership meant he seemed to have no will to sort out Momentum, anti-Semitism, the trans issue and he failed to campaign convincingly during the lead up to the Brexit referendum

Previously anti-Europe, he failed to take a convincing stance for staying in the EU and seemed to take a step back to see what the British people decided.

Aside from socialist rhetoric he seemed to be reciting from text books, he failed to take much of a position on anything even his idiotic brother, Piers.

He failed to lead.

So many interesting and thought provoking replies here. Thank you. Reading through the thread, what’s jumping out at me is how much personality matters. It’s made me wonder whether the rise of reality TV (and maybe the increasing coverage of US presidential politics) is having an impact on the way we view politicians and engage with politics.

I realise that many people disliked both Corbyn and Johnson, the reason I’m saying many preferred Johnson is that the red wall turned blue in parts.

To those who think I’m not genuine- I’m not sure what you think my hidden agenda is? I am interested in politics, but too busy to read much beyond the headlines. I didn’t vote in 2017 election and wasn’t taking a huge amount of interest in politics at the time because of stressful circs in my own life.

I am a Labour supporter - but I am not tribal about it. I asked the question in good faith because I want to understand.

(And I am a regular mumsnetter who name changes a lot. There’s a lovely post that pops up regularly by a lady who thought that she was infertile but found out she was unexpectedly pregnant before Christmas last year. Her first post was asking if there was definitely a second line on the test, I think she took it as routine before going into hospital for a procedure. She took about 6 tests to be sure! And she updates regularly about the pregnancy is going - she’s having a boy and I think she’s due this month. If that helps people to believe I am a real poster 🤨)

It is also truly remarkable how much clothes matter to the British people.

He's a local MP and activist, he's not a leader, that was always a problem. It allowed him to be undermined in his own cabinet by his deputy leader among others.

Not really.

The British are scruffier than some.

They rejected Corbyn, but chose a scruff for PM anyway.

He would've increased taxes for middle earners (in London terms - not the super rich), he didn't understand international affairs, he was weak on all foreign policy and invited terrorists for tea in Parliament, he allowed anti-semitism to grow under his watch and condoned it online (supporting a clearly antisemitic painting in Islington TH).

I wouldn't let an earnest, well meaning teenager run the country so allowing a pensioner with similar levels of deductive reason and thoughtfulness around policy would be equally undesirable.

Exactly this.

Eh? What verse is the Scot-crushing in?

I think it’s an interesting point that personality plays a huge part in politics.

take someone like Trump - absolute psychopath. But you can be sure that Putin never would have invaded Ukraine if Trump was still in power because he wouldn’t have been quite sure if Trump would have supported him or immediately hit the red button!

in the UK I do feel that labour MPs are more driven by what they feel is right. They don’t seem to have the self serving ambition that fuels the Tories. That’s the thing that scares me most about the Tories - they will do and say anything if they think it will get them ahead. They are only interested in their own self ambition. and it’s not just the cabinet - our local Tory MPs would throw anyone under a bus if it got them ahead

Also, I am coming to see how he was viewed as overly (dangerously?) idealistic, taking pacifism too far.

Although I think the Tories have taken us much further right than many expected or comfortable with, they have been in power for a long time now and psychologically people prefer the familiar, so Corbyn’s very left-wing stance though perhaps no more extreme, seems more alarming.

It’s made me wonder whether the rise of reality TV (and maybe the increasing coverage of US presidential politics) is having an impact on the way we view politicians and engage with politics.

I think there's a weirdness in the British people that embraces the kind of maverick, flamboyant, scruffy, funny haired chancer. and makes them life This is the country that adored Jimmy Savile when he was alive. Boris Johnson basically used his whole schtick (watch Savile's Netflix documentary) in terms of his public profile, to cultivate his image.

It's more simple than that though. The country does what Rupert Murdoch tells them to and the Daily Mail etc holds a lot of sway. The mainstream media were pathological about Corbyn from start to finish. Whether you like his policies or not, the brainwashing was unprecedented. The likes of the Mail are still drunk on the power now by clinging onto Boris.

Also, I am coming to see how he was viewed as overly (dangerously?) idealistic, taking pacifism too far.

If he acted on hiss like for NATO this is a very benign way of looking at it

If you follow it through it is weakening security considerably

Nuclear ‘deterrent’ is designed to do exactly the opposite. The clue is in the name. But the deterrent part only works if armament and disarmament are done multilaterally, as opposed to what Corbyn wanted.

He would've increased taxes for middle earners (in London terms - not the super rich

The increased taxes would have been levelled out by things like enhanced public services and lower energy bills which it would have paid for.

But the middle classes continue to vote Tory for promises of low tax, yet get poorer every time by stagnant wages and increased cost of living, while suffering a decline in public services.

I’m just glad we missed out on the “chaos” the Tories warned about under Ed Miliband. Instead it’s been a decade of smooth sailing. Haha.

In pp His dislike..

We can stop talking about BoJo now. It’s all been summed up in 5 minutes here: