chapotraphouse

It makes little sense to assign reactionaries to high level positions within your new left-wing party with the intent of purging them later. Also, as leader of the Labour Party he had the opportunity to purge the Blairite wing, but instead chose to work with them while they undermined him from the inside. There's no reason to believe there will be purges.

Exactly. Over the last ten years Farage has been on Question Time over 40 times. Corbyn once. And during that time he came within a hair of being Primeminister whilst Farage had less than five MPs total. Farage is a creation of the media & the British establisment.

he's not just transphobic either, he's also a landlord, homophobe, and opponent of abortion rights

hanging out with an outright social conservative and landlord who opposes LGBT+ rights and abortion for one (Adnan Hussain)

Whilst some of it has been exaggerated by the usual wrecker types (Trimbley, Lansman etc) Corbyn appears to have surrounding himself with a lot of his previous inner circle, including the likes of James James Schneider -- who is good on TV, but had an undeniably moderating influence when Corybn was LOTO and also happens to be married to Keir Starmer's primary spokesperson which is -- who seem to be mostly siloing themselves off and giving themselves titles rather than working with the newer more combative crop of people, mostly around Zarah Sultana.

Zarah Sultana has been the one going on the attack over the last year, taking legal action against anyone who falsely tries to smear her as an antisemite, and has been unequivocally clear that she's explicitly anti-zionist & rejects the false arguement for a supremecist Jewish state, rather than getting bogged down in liberal zionist talking points.

Corybn then did a widely promoted interview where, when asked about it as he obviously would be, he gave a really shitty, seemingly pissed off at Zarah answer about how it wasn't helpful that she was bringing up that and the way the IHRA antisemitism definition was a trap. It was personally snarky and shitty, he lied about which definition he preferred (claiming he supported one that wasn't put forward until two years later) and gennerally created a massive open goal for press and detractors to run with it as a wedge between them (which increasingly seems real) and obsess over it in the press.

As pointed out elsewhere, there's also some pretty shitty, reactionary people in the orbit of the new party (even if they're not officially candidates yet or anything) which is partly as a result of a lot of the people around Corbyn seemingly pushing hard for a more federated, loose party structure; the benefits of which might be to make alliances with green and independent MPs easier, but the downside is you're likely to get a lot more shitty candidates and people in the wider orbit.