I'm what some people might describe as a fairly typical "Corbynista".
I certainly don't speak for all Corbyn supporters - not least because like any large group, we have among us a very wide range of views & backgrounds.
Time to put a few myths to bed...
Q How do you feel about being called a #Corbynista?
A Many people use the term 'Corbynista' as a pejorative, in order to scapegoat, demonize or negatively stereotype a large group of diverse people they tend to disagree with - but some Corbyn supporters embrace the term.
Q Aren't you part of an extremist Cult?
A LOL! All Corbyn supporters recognise & accept that Corbyn (like everyone else) has made mistakes. In fact, we often disagree about & debate exactly what they were, but the policies we support are popular, & normal across much of Europe.
Q Aren't Corbynistas obsessed with ideological purity?
A No. As with anyone involved in politics, some Corbyn supporters are more or less willing than others to compromise, & we all know that while it's very important to be principled, sometimes realpolitik overrides ideology.
Q Don't Corbynistas believe antisemitism in @UKLabour is all a 'smear'?
A A tiny minority might think this. While 99% of us accept it IS a real problem, which must be eliminated, there's no doubt whatsoever that occasionally its scale has been exaggerated for political purposes.
Q Do Corbynistas hate "centrists"?
A Some do, some don't! Imho, much of the animosity & distrust comes from the belief that some "centrist" @UKLabour MPs are more ideologically aligned with "moderate" Conservatives than with traditional Labour or socialist policies & values.
Q Why do Corbynistas demonize centrist @UKLabour MPs?
A SOME do. Corbynistas hate "free-market" ideology (embraced by some centrists) & many of us believe we'd be three years into a transformative @UKLabour Govt had some centrists not persistently attacked & undermined Corbyn.
Q Why do Corbynistas hate Blair/Starmer?
A Some do, some don't. Many Corbynistas voted for both Blair & Starmer. Keir promised unity, but we're disappointed in this aspect of his leadership. New Labour did some great things, but Iraq & its embrace of neoliberalism disappointed.
Q Surely any Labour Govt is preferable to any Tory Govt?
A Most of us agree. However, many of us fear that reverting back to the failed pre-Corbyn strategy of 'Tory-Lite' will alienate many @UKLabour members, is not a wise strategy, & it will result in failure. Baby, bathwater.
Q So why don't you stop moaning & get behind Starmer?
A Labour must be a democratic Party. Some of us praise Starmer when he deserves it (eg commitment to cancelling student debt) & express displeasure when we think he doesn't (eg SpyCops). Disagreement is normal in politics!
Q if you're so bloody reasonable, why do so many people in @UKLabour hate you?
We're a broad range of people, with diverse backgrounds & opinions, but given our antiquated electoral system, only one of two parties can form a Govt, so many very left-wing people choose Labour.
Q So what is a Corbynista?
A Depends who you ask! Language is malleable, & meaning is always context-dependent. But if I were to try & define it, I'd say it's simply someone who was inspired by Corbyn's values & the policies he introduced. We know he wasn't perfect - nobody is.
Q So why are so many Corbynistas so rude?
A Quite often, people who feel very passionately about the disgusting way already vulnerable people are treated by the Govt & the press, & who are angry about grotesque wealth inequality, let their tempers get the better of them. I do.
Like I say, I don't speak for all Corbynistas - that would be ridiculous. I feel angry about the direction our country is going in, & I feel anger toward the Govt. I try to be civil on Twitter, but sometimes I fail - we're all stressed, & we're all human.
It's fine to disagree.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A multibillion-dollar scheme that exchanges cash from drug and gun sales in the UK for crypto—digital tokens hiding users’ identities—has enabling “sanctions evasions and the highest levels of organised crime, including providing money-laundering services to the Russian state”. theguardian.com/politics/2025/…
In 2023, the hedge fund co-founded by GB "News" owner Paul Marshall, who employs 60% of anti-Net Zero Reform UK's MPs, had £1.8 BILLION invested in fossil fuel firms.
Harborne (who has Thai citizenship under the name 'Chakrit Sakunkrit) also makes money from fossil fuels.
I and countless others are sick to death of the billionaire-funded Reform UK propaganda machine, GB “News”, and their decontextualised ‘facts’ that would make Goebbels blush.
Let’s examine the claim that “one quarter of foreign sex offenders come from just five countries”.
Yes, the raw data comes from a genuine Ministry of Justice (MoJ) prison census, but the way it’s being weaponised is deeply misleading.
The statistic sounds explosive, and deliberately so: a factoid engineered to sound like a revelation of hidden danger.
The right-wing information pipeline: a cherry-picked fragment of official data stripped of context, laundered through an opaquely funded “think tank” that isn't a think tank, amplified by billionaire-funded media, and weaponised by opportunistic politicians for electoral gain.
In the September 2025 @SkyNews Immigration Debate, chaired by Trevor “Muslims are not like us” Phillips, Reform UK’s head of policy Zia Yusuf made a series of inaccurate and highly misleading claims about migration, and more recently, on @BBCNewsnight, about social housing.
These assertions are easily disproved with publicly available data, but often go largely unchallenged on air, despite being about some of the most sensitive and polarised issues in politics.
Yusuf started by claiming that UK net migration “last year” was “about a million.”
When a newspaper repeatedly publishes misleading, distorted, or outright inaccurate stories, the public expects independent regulators to step in.
What if I told you the editor responsible for these stories is now in charge of writing the very rules that govern press ethics?
Privately educated Chris Evans, editor of The Daily Telegraph since 2014, has—since January 2024—simultaneously served as Chair of the IPSO Editors’ Code of Practice Committee, the body that drafts, reviews, and rewrites the ethical rulebook that the UK press is meant to follow.
Evans holds this regulatory role at a time when his own paper is producing more factual corrections and clarifications than almost any other major UK outlet — with an overwhelming concentration in politically weaponised right-wing themes.
The BBC isn’t perfect — but it’s ours. As coordinated attacks on its independence intensify, I warn that if we don’t defend it now, we may lose more than a broadcaster — we may lose a cornerstone of British democracy...
As a long-time critic of the @BBC, let me spell it out: what we’re seeing right now isn’t organic outrage — it’s a sophisticated coordinated campaign by ideological enemies and commercial competitors to undermine the BBC’s independence and funding.
If you can’t see that, you’re being played — and that’s exactly the point.
Let’s start with Michael Prescott, author of the dodgy dossier leaked exclusively to The Telegraph, who is a PR man and former political editor at Murdoch’s Sunday Times.
Growing numbers of people are angry and disillusioned with the political establishment.
Desperate voters are easy prey for manipulative populists—as they were in Germany in the 1930s.
But the problem isn't immigrants or religious minorities. It's always wealth distribution.
The story of wealth in Britain over the past eight decades since WWII is not one of ‘the invisible hand’, but of deliberate policy choices—choices that once built one of the most equal society in modern history, but now sustain one of the most unequal in the developed world.
Data tracking wealth distribution from 1945 to 2025 reveal a striking U-shaped curve: a rapid reduction in wealth inequality after World War II, making Britain one of the most equal countries on earth by the mid 1970s, followed by an unbroken rise.