I understand you want the party have have a “soul” which to a large extent it lost under Blair and continued with the likes of the change U.K. supporters but the party also needs a “brain” which Corbyn and his supporters showed no signs of having, it was just road crash after road crash.
Most Corbyn supporters voted Starmer in, FYI. You're working with stereotypes. You get very able people at all levels of the party, it's not like the brains are concentrated at the top, far from it.
I don't want the party to have a "soul" or anything like that. I want it to be active, democratic, and representative. The Lib Dems are active at a grassroots level despite their numbers and it's why they have what little success they do. Tories are more active than one might think at a grassroots level, and they don't need the numbers because they are very well represented at every level of society, but even more importantly in the press and behind the scenes. Labour under Blair was hollowed out, purposefully: it haemorrhaged members and those that remained were rendered passive, by design. They much preferred this because councils and the PLP function through exceptionally grubby patronage networks and an active base can interfere with trough-feeding and careerism.
They eventually had to concede that they'd pushed it too far, however, when they couldn't even get people to leaflet for them. The leadership voting reforms that saw Corbyn elected were designed partly to further diminish the unions, but also to attract and engage members. Just as they underestimated the need for a base, however, they underestimated the surge in appetite for some kind of democratic involvement on the left, and they've been trying to de-activate the base ever since.
Again, they're prioritising careers over long term electoral success, never mind actually changing things once they're in power. What happened in Scotland and the red wall constituencies can happen anywhere. If local communities are simultaneously shut out from local involvement in power and talked down to by out of touch stuffed shirts on a national level then they organise elsewhere, disengage entirely, or look to populist politicians whose main promise is to put a stop to politics altogether.
There was a brief moment there when local party membership swelled, became more representative, and began to connect with other organisations and voters at a local level. Not nearly enough was done, but it's clear that for those at the top it was too much, and they're jettisoning whatever gains were made. We'll see what happens, but it seems to me the most likely outcomes are either a return to slow decline or spectacular collapse, which is what's happened to many centre-left parties on the continent. I'd take the latter outcome, personally. It saves time.
Anyway, another unrequested lecture there, and I said I'd stop, so I'm out of any more discussion of the Labour Party, especially now that they've rendered themselves spectators as regards the topic of this thread.