This is one of the best tweets I've ever read on this platform. So refreshing and perceptive. Bravo Charlie!

The point is: the Labour membership has *always* been much more nuanced than most assume. That's why so many happily voted for Corbyn AND Starmer. https://twitter.com/charliemansell/status/1327369818497048576

The media's caricature of the Labour membership under Corbyn as a 'bunch of Trots' was unadulterated offensive bollocks. Corbyn won so heavily because he was the ONLY candidate in 2015 or 2016 with any real ideas for a moribund, intellectually and literally bankrupt party.

Sure enough, right after the GE, I noticed a huge swing on here behind Starmer - from huge numbers of the same people who'd backed Corbyn.

There was no contradiction in that. Only dogmatists - who'd misunderstood Corbyn's popularity in the first place - thought otherwise.

Now, what Starmer seems to be doing - isolating the left - is wrong and likely to backfire. In some ways, he's misinterpreted his own victory.

But by the same token, he ain't half as unpopular in the membership as some on here might suggest. It's a mix; it's complicated.

Lest we forget: the Labour Party has always, always, ALWAYS been a coalition of all sorts of different interests. That's been the case right since its inception. The most obvious tension has always been between socialists and liberals - but there are many tensions. It's normal.

It's not about shutting that dysfunction down - which is where I strongly disagree with Starmer's approach. Creative, intellectual and philosophical tension is actually a good thing: the best ideas develop through disagreement and healthy discussion.

In other words, it's about how the leadership manages the dysfunction. So far, it's not exactly convinced on that front - it has to broaden its mindset, open up and engage. With everyone.