So now I'm really confused trisher. Who's the elephant and who's the mouse in this?
No one has said the Labour Party is The Marxist Party. No one has said they've copied pages from Das Kapital. Same as no one believes the Tories will deny abortions to victims of rape.
I think the economic theories admired by the shadow chancellor are just a little more important than the personal beliefs of a backbench MP. I'd disagree that they hold equivalence. No one is voting for JRM to set the ethical framework for the nation. They would be voting for JMcD to set the financial framework though. That's why their beliefs are not of comparable importance. One is highly relevant to the influence and power they would have in office. One really isn't.
I'd also say that it's not only what they intend to do that's important, it's the outcome of that action that matters. However fantastic his intentions, they are not feasible and the outcome could be chaotic. I mean, who thinks it costs nothing to buy assets 'because it nets itself off'. (I can find you the video of him saying this on the Andrew Marr show if you like) I know when Corbyn tried to put that chestnut into practice in Portcullis House at the cafe, he had to leave without his assets (4 cups of caffe latte). Those theories might sound great on the podium, but really, if you can't make them work for a few cups of coffee, what chance do you have with the transport, power and utility infrastructure of the whole country?