Most of liberalism’s biggest heavyweights did not support Jeremy Corbyn. The official wing of liberalism is generally so because it still benefits the privileged the most on an economic level, thriving in the shared part of a Venn diagram which has its most powerful rival on the other side. It mostly supports the poor having some of the same rights that it does, just so long as there are still privileged bubbles.
We live in a world where in all arenas cultural tastemakers often have the benefit of a lot of privilege; metaphorically, they were given wings that make them “better-worldly.” Their approval is often what makes things viably positive. Brand liberalism’s biggest cultural tastemakers wanted Corbyn, relatively privileged in his own way, to be a joke. But to a lot of people the sense of equity that he offered stood for itself apparently. Though the UK’s conservative leadership still has a lot of power, Corbyn was a big part of the rebirth of something that seemed to be crumbling and in doing so helped to establish that the power of the shared economic interests of conservatives/brand liberalism is not absolute.
One could compare the influence of cultural tastemakers in that election being somewhat atypically disregarded to another national election just a short while ago – in which the establishment’s cultural tastemakers weren’t quite the heavyweights they were supposed to be.
Among what makes this distinctly different is that Corbyn went the distance while doing the opposite of appealing to xenophobia, nationalism and racism – a lowest common denominator trinity that can be quite the powerful and profitable brand.
It’s all quite hard, even with wings that are relatively feeble next to some brand’s, but I suppose those are the most human — especially the seemingly feeble, self-made ones one scrambled together when there are no wings as a given. And those aren’t just jokes for privileged bubbles, be they red or blue.