Re Johnson's outrageous IRA claims here, I think there's something to be said on the subject of Corbyn, and the lack of solidarity shown to him by his PLP colleagues.

The fact is that most of the PLP never defended Corbyn over this oft-repeated slur that everyone who went door-knocking for Labour between 2015 and 2019 must have heard recited back to them by a home-owning, sexagenarian Leave voter.

While those of us on the radical left believe that 'solidarity is joy' (the slogan for @twtsouthampton), solidarity- acting in support of those with whom we share interests- is also, in many ways, pragmatic.

The failure to show even a pragmatic solidarity with Corbyn over these smears was ridiculous given that New Labour's still trumpets the Good Friday Agreement as one of its crowning achievements.

In his palpable fury at Johnson's disgraceful comments, did it occur to him to refute the allegations made about CORBYN? Not for a second.

There have, of course, been *all kinds* of disgusting false allegations about Corbyn, And the fact is that Starmer *did* sit next to Corbyn on the front bench for years.

Of course, the lack of PLP solidarity with Corbyn was due to the PLP calculating that they did not share interests with him. This calculation was perhaps correct in the cases of the worst, most right wing grifters, but any of them serious about reforming Britain made a mistake.

Johnson's attack today is precisely what many on the left were warning of when we asked "What do you think will happen to Keir when he's the most left wing guy left on the stage?"

And of course the fact that what Johnson said was a dishonest smear doesn't matter. As many of those now in and around LOTO know all to well.

Johnson doesn't think Starmer is an IRA-loving Britain-hater any more than the Labour right think Jeremy Corbyn is an antisemite.

Doesn't matter though does it? What matters is whether you can convince enough other people to believe it.

And as the Labour right know, if one smear doesn't work, another might.

And so it begins.

Plus for years now PMQs has just been a meme-generating exercise, which means Johnson won. No one will remember his otherwise shambolic performance or Keir's red-faced, "YOU TAKE THAT BACK!", I'd like to speak to your manager reaction. They'll just remember Johnson went there.

It would be in Starmer's interests to do the bare minimum and say "Jeremy may be many things, but he's not a terrorist sympathiser". If he's not prepared to offer even the most mealy-mouthed defence of Corbyn then what Johnson said might as well be true.

This is relitigating much of what I wrote here for @NewSocialistUK, but I think a crucial thing to understand is that Starmer believes he's beholden to the Labour right, and the Labour right care more about control of Labour than Labour winning GEs. https://newsocialist.org.uk/plea-wavering-comrades-beware-labour-right/

Starmer is worried that any defence of Corbyn will have the right briefing against him. And he's right to be worried. But the only way we'll get change is through a reckoning with these people.