As you're posting in a British newspaper and refer to British politics, I'm going to guess that you're British. There have just been elections in Britain for a position with one of the largest direct electorates in Europe - the Mayor of London. That election had only one candidate who supports all the beliefs that the "general public can see perfectly well": George Galloway. He received just 1.4% of the vote.
As for your points:
a) You like Trump because he's against NATO and you hate the United States. You like Trump because he is a great danger to the Western world.
b) i) When asked, more British people have favorable views about Israel than not. As Israeli Arabs don't have to live in separate areas, aren't deprived of the vote, don't have to use separate shops and hospitals, represent the country in politics, diplomacy, business, sports and the arts - none of which was possible for Africans in apartheid South Africa - your knowledge of Israel, South Africa or Disneyland don't add up to much.
ii) Denying the right of one country, and one country alone, to exist is not a progressive duty. To couch your criticism in hoary tropes about "the Rothschilds" and "Jewish Zionist influence" (true of much of the rhetoric on the far-left; I'd bet my bottom dollar the OP is a supporter of Ken Livingstone) is no less racist than if you accused China as being guilty of cunning devilry behind a mask of inscrutability. Saying that using those racist stereotypes has nothing to do with non-Israeli Jews is no more convincing than saying that it's OK to call China inscrutable but devilishly cunning because millions of Chinese live outside China - criticism of a country is not a talisman against anyone seeing you're a racist bigot.
c) i) What sense and pragmatism ended up with much of Dagestan - a province of Putin's own country - now being in the hands of jihadis? Of hospitals and residential areas in Syria being bombed into the ground? Of invading and occupying the territory of other countries? Of his opponents fleeing Russia for their lives, often to be killed in exile? Turning Russia into a country where journalists who ask questions can expect jail at best and often death?
ii) And what about the "nut-cases running Western policy"? They're the people that don't arrest you or have you murdered, but rather have arranged it so that you can rant at them without the slightest concern of the consequences, safe in the knowledge that nobody's going to hold your family hostage while they hand you a gun and force you to fight a war for their benefit, and safe that you can spend your time organizing the "revolution" of your groupuscule of special snowflakes.
d) Jeremy Corbyn's "ethical commitment" extends to warmly approving of IRA murder, inviting the head of the IRA's political wing to Parliament a few weeks after its attempt to murder half the government in 1984; his welcoming of Hamas and Hezbollah as "friends" to Parliament. He says he did this in the name of promoting peace processes - strangely enough, not only is there no record of him ever inviting any Ulster Unionist or Zionist, for the simple reason that he wanted the IRA, Hamas and Hezbollah to win their violent struggles. During the real peace process in Northern Ireland, the side he supported actually begged Tony Blair, the leader of his party, to shut Corbyn's band of supporters up, as their "principled" rhetoric made it difficult to persuade some of the hard-line Irish nationalists to support the peace agreement. As for his being "nice" and "mild-mannered," anyone who has seen the recent Vice documentary or his and his supporters' treatment of the media will take that with a salt flat or two.
e) The EU has, for much of its life, seen itself as an alternative to the power of the US, but we've already seen that actual facts don't interest you very much. Meanwhile, the Kinnocks got to work in the EU because they were elected by the people of the UK. All the ministers and commission heads are elected and their work is overseen by the European Parliament, which is also elected. This, apparently, makes it "undemocratic." Furthermore, lower income groups are a great deal more prosperous in Europe than they were before the EU, so the transfer of wealth from the people of Europe to European big business leaders isn't working out too well, either. And this "vast, useless, parasitic bureaucracy" has about the same number of employees as the BBC. But, there again, anything that doesn't threaten the West's safety, champion tyrannies you like while pouring race hate over democracies you don't, anything that doesn't belong to your personality cult, anything that isn't in the business of turning the world into the workers' paradise that is Venezuela, isn't good enough for you.
That's the trouble the far-left have with the working class - they just don't understand "working class politics."
Sorry, everyone, for the rant.