Ever since Jeremy Corbyn won his leadership challenge last year (which was actually an attempted coup organized by former leader Blair and the British establishment) by more votes than in his first Labour Party leadership contest victory in 2015, I’ve thought that if May called a snap election, he’d win it. The wind of change is with him, no doubt about it. Forget the polls; Corbyn is drawing larger crowds than Blair did 20 years ago, and that monster’s ‘New’ Labour party won the ’97 election by a landslide. Theresa May, meanwhile, shrank from public sight in recent weeks, refusing even to participate in TV debates, while hardly anyone showed up at her campaign rallies.
A ‘populist’ Corbyn victory for an ‘Old’ Labour party in the UK would be the latest in a series of political earthquakes across the West in recent years. The non-stop bleating in the UK media about how ‘unelectable’ Corbyn is has proven to be inversely proportional to a.) just how popular the man is, and b.) just how much most people despise the entrenched elites. People who’ve never shown an interest in politics before, much less voted, are getting behind the plain-talking, plain-dressing Corbyn.
So, all other things being equal, this is Corbyn’s election to lose. What needs to be taken into account, however, is the amount of vote rigging the British security services may be willing to risk. Everything is at stake for them at this time: Brexit, Scottish independence, Irish reunification; you can bet that all lights are flashing red in GCHQ, Whitehall, St James’ Palace and the Foreign Office. The United Kingdom’s very existence as such is in question, the country’s international alliances are in flux, and ‘democratic regime change’ threatens from within.
Provided they are successful in counting the votes ‘correctly’ (ensuring a Conservative win), then I’m afraid that the Manchester and London terror attacks might suffice as plausible narrative for why an otherwise truly unelectable bunch like Theresa May, Boris Johnson and Amber Rudd will be returning to government. Their campaign was tanking by mid-May, and the only thing that got PM May back on the TV, and thus back ‘on message’ and away from being a figure of ridicule, were those two bloody events.
No one is talking this time about Russian meddling in the election. Britons instead are wondering what to make of this astonishing intervention by ‘ISIS’ on the eve of their election. No matter your stance on the likelihood of sinister government plots to carry out or facilitate terror attacks, you cannot have failed to notice that, in this situation, ‘ISIS’ has – unintentionally or otherwise – come to the aid of the Tories, and thus the establishment, by strategically positioning themselves against the most significant democratic challenge to the status quo in the UK’s modern history.
For over a year now, the British government has fended off repeated criticism of its enormous arms sales to Saudi Arabia, and repeated questions about what the Saudis are doing with those weapons. The Home Secretary (interior minister) Amber Rudd, at an election debate in her constituency last week, literally shut down any discussion of Saudi Arabian connections with ISIS, while May buried the report into Saudi Arabian funding of Islamist terror groups on the same day that Corbyn declared “we must have some difficult conversations with Saudi Arabia.”
Even if the Conservatives ‘win’ tomorrow, they are merely delaying, for a short while, the inevitable collapse of the kind of corrupt, elitist, anti-human policies that have defined British establishment politics for far too long. Consider the fact that, by rigging (either directly, or through lies and propaganda) the general election so that they can continue selling weapons to headchoppers while imposing more austerity at home, the Conservatives are simply giving themselves another term to continue the very same policies that have turned a large majority of the British public against them.
One has to wonder; where do these establishment figures believe this is all going to end up? With concentration camps? Oh, wait…