Patriotism. It is a test Jeremy Corbyn failed to meet. It is a test his successor must pass. Corbyn’s anti-western worldview, shared by his most senior advisers and cheerleaders, goes to the core of his political identity. It separates him from every postwar Labour leader and, as we saw in the election, from millions of Labour voters.

This view holds that most of the world’s ills are down to western imperialism and that if others commit a reprehensible act, we probably left them with little choice. It sees Nato as an aggressor, is instinctively anti-American – long before President Trump – and holds Israel up as being a unique evil. It loudly condemns any western use of force and is usually silent on Russian or non-western backed military action. And it infantilises terrorism, denying it the power of human agency or any dynamic of its own and seeing it only as a reaction to what we do.

This is the thread that links Corbyn’s meetings with various groups engaged in or justifying terrorism, his instinctive defence of Russia and the antisemitism which has taken hold in parts of the Labour party since he became leader. Of course, leaders and governments have to sit down with people they wouldn’t otherwise want to – but there is a big difference between the hard work of peacemaking and simply picking a side.

Perhaps the peak illustration of Corbyn’s worldview came in response to the attempted murder of the Skripals by Russian agents in Salisbury when he refused to accept the Russian state was responsible and echoed the Kremlin’s demand for a sample of nerve agent so the Russian state could decide its own guilt or innocence. That was reinforced by his decision to make a speech the day after the London Bridge attacks ignoring any terrorism before 2003, including 9/11, and repeating his view that once more we had all brought this on ourselves.

Labour candidates were confronted with voter anger over the worldview of our leader and who he instinctively sided with Pat McFadden

Voters have a deep sense about these instincts. They don’t think their own country is always perfect. Of course it isn’t. But they do want their leaders to believe in it, not always to think the worst of ourselves and absolve others of their responsibilities. Labour candidates on doorsteps during the recent election campaign were confronted by voter anger over the worldview of our leader and who he instinctively sided with time after time.

The impact of this worldview on Labour has not just been political but also cultural, because it enabled the permissive environment for the appalling and shameful antisemitism which has driven some people out of the party, seen others walk away in despair, and many only sticking with Labour despite deep reservations. The attempts to deal with antisemitism through changing administrative procedures and complaints mechanisms could never get to the bottom of it because its roots lay in the worldview held at the top of the party by the leader and his closest advisers.

So as Corbyn departs the Labour leadership, hopefully taking with him court followers who have been advocates of this worldview, the party needs a reset on patriotism and how we view our country.

Patriotism is not the same as nationalism. It should be open and comfortable with the diverse society that is the UK today and not seek a rewind button to some past age of glory. It should not hide from the bad in British history but also be conscious of the good. Fundamentally, it should believe that British power and influence – both hard and soft – is a force for good in the world. This is particularly important when much of the world wonders whether after our Brexit debate we still have the confidence to be a confident, outward-looking country.

There is an additional, more urgent reason why Labour needs to rediscover its patriotic instincts. With Scotland now dominated by the separatist SNP and England in danger of domination by an increasingly English nationalist Tory party, who will stop the UK being torn apart by competing nationalisms? This is the vital role a changed Labour party can play – but only if people think we really believe in the country we are trying to hold together.

In the wake of its shattering defeat the great danger is that Labour underestimates or lacks the will to pursue the degree of change needed before the public will trust us again. To opt for continuity Corbynism with the same outlook, but a different name and face, would be a dereliction of our duty to offer the public an alternative to Conservatism that they can believe in. And splitting the difference between where we are coming from and where we need to get to won’t fulfil our historic duty either. If that happens, the public could tune us out for a long time.

Big change is needed in Labour’s policy and culture. Resetting the worldview which has done so much damage and is so outside Labour’s better traditions is only one part of the necessary overhaul. But it is a good and essential place to start.

Pat McFadden is Labour MP for Wolverhampton South East