Why Jeremy Corbyn must be removed as Labour leader, whatever the cost.

Yes, this is 2016, yes, this is Great Britain, and yes, I am advocating the immediate, undemocratic removal of Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour party. Despite Corbyn’s support from amongst new Labour voters (not to be confused with New Labour voters, obviously) and his landslide win in the election to become leader, he must go.

Corbyn reminds me of Christopher Lee’s Count Dooku at the beginning of my childhood favourite film, Star Wars: Episode 3 — Revenge of the Sith. For those unfamiliar with the scene of the Count’s death, Anakin beheads the helpless Sith lord, despite knowing it is the wrong thing to do, and has to live with the consequences.

What might seem quite tangential does, to my mind, take on some relevance here. At the end of the day, there is one less Sith lord out there, and the end justifies the mean in terms of his demise —he was executed before he could do anyone any more damage. Whilst literally, this is beginning to sound more like IS than it does British democracy, the metaphor gains more relevance here.

I am by no means calling for Corbyn’s head. I do not wish to see him killed, maimed, or otherwise injured. However, he is simply too dangerous to remain as Labour leader. He is destroying the party from the inside, splitting the vote from inside the party and is essentially paying for the taxi to take lower-class voters to UKIP. He is unelectable, and if the 2020 election arrives with Corbyn at the helm, Labour will do disastrously. It may split, it may go into a coalition with the SNP — who, under Nicola Sturgeon, could well dominate a weaker leader — or it may just be forced into political irrelevance as UKIP translate their share of the vote into seats won.

This is nothing new. Yet, I feel the argument has to be made that someone, somewhere, has to remove him. This isn’t a dictatorship, this isn’t corrupt politics, this is a sacrifice for the greater good. This is equivalent to going against what Mr Skywalker believed in, by killing Dooku, but realising he’s ‘too dangerous’ to not do anything about.

The way I see it, it would be a political farce to remove Corbyn. I admit this whole-heartedly, openly, and honestly. It could destroy British political integrity (if such a thing still remains), and would anger Corbyn’s supporters — there are, after all, a few who idolise him.

But the alternative is, in my opinion, even worse. Corbyn destroying the Labour party is one thing, but the greater fear has to be that he will lead Labour into such an oblivion that even the theory of an Opposition as we know it will be banished from 2020. And here’s how:

  1. Jeremy Corbyn leads Labour into the next election, having divided his party, but no official split is made before the election for obvious reasons — a ‘united’ party will do better in the election. In 2020, only 600 seats are up for grabs due to boundary changes to cut the cost of politics.
  2. The Tories win, again. This is almost a foregone conclusion; Theresa May faces no real competition from anyone. Labour lose seats, UKIP gain some, the SNP hold theirs. Using the Telegraph’s figures, the Tories extend their majority to 353 seats — meaning a majority of 53 — Labour falls to just 171, the SNP take all 51 seats in Scotland, the Liberal Democrats have just 5 seats, while the other 20 seats go to ‘Other’ parties — mostly UKIP, I’d imagine.
The new constituency boundaries, with current polling results in 2020.

4. The Tories are naturally delighted. However, there is no credible party that can take on the role of HM Opposition — the New Labour party, on 100 seats, does not possess anywhere near the amount of seats required to genuinely be considered a credible alternative to the Tories. Scrutiny of the policies will become even more difficult as several parties are now involved. The Tories could dominate Parliament; with a very workable majority of over 50, they are almost guaranteed to be able to pass whatever legislation they want. Even if they struggled, temporary coalitions with independant MPs, UKIP or even some rebellious Labour MPs would smoothen the passage of legislation.

Parliamentary sovereignty as a concept could well be taken to the limit, although it probably won’t for fear of implosion. However, the concept of a two-party state would be destroyed, but nor would it be a multi-party state. It would instead become an elected dictatorship of the Tories, if only until Labour resumed as one coherent party.

And this is surely a greater issue for British democracy than the removal of an elected leader. Corbyn threatens the political system as we know it, and whilst he is not outwardly dangerous in the manner of a Donald Trump or a Vladimir Putin, he is a huge threat — and partly because he is totally unaware of it. Corbyn will inadvertently lead not just Labour, but opposition to the Tories, down the metaphorical drainpipe unless he is removed as Leader. However undemocratic it is, however stupid it might sound, it would solve the problems that Corbyn has caused. So surely, it must be worth considering..?