If by zealot you mean someone uncompromising, I agree with that.
So far Corbyn doesn't seem worried by the existence different opinions. Unfortunately that state of affairs is too sophisticated and insufficiently clear to garner votes. At some point it needs to coalesce into a consistent message, and some of the areas of difference are so fundamental that a compromise difficult if not impossible.
I'm sure there could be a compromise position on nuclear weapons for example, but Corbyn has already painted himself into a corner on that one.
The best thing for the non-zealots in the party to do now is work out when the right time is to overset the current leadership, and how to do it.
A starting point would be to challenge the one-person-one-vote and £3 vote system. I suspect a critical number of votes at the margin came from the same sort of idiots who go on anti-capitalist marches and set fire to police cars, certainly more votes than were wielded by the PLP.
Under the previous electoral college arrangement, one third weight was given to each of the PLP, the wider membership, and the trades union votes. Now the PLP has essentially no impact at all other than in the nomination process, so they cocked up the only safeguard they had!
Politicians generally seem to be very bad at the concept of moral hazard and unintended consequences.
|
