Political parties are entitled to elect/select their leaders as they wish, but Jeremy Corbyn’s election corrupts the established British Parliamentary system.
There are parties which do not have a single Member of Parliament. Until fairly recently (2010) the Greens had none and, until August 2014, UKIP also had none, its first (the Conservative MP Bob Spink who defected in 2008) having lost his seat at the next general election in 2010. However, for political parties which do have more than two MPs, the long established practice was for MPs only to elect THEIR leader, the leader of their respective parliamentary parties, which was consistent with the constitutional practice whereby the Sovereign sends for the ‘member who could command a majority in the House’ to charge with forming a government.
The Labour Party’s arrangements fail to distinguish between leadership of the Parliamentary Labour Party and leadership of the Labour Party at large. John Major drew attention to this distinction a few years ago in 1995 when, as prime minister, he resigned as leader of the Conservative Party but not as prime minister. SEE: John Major ~ Wikipedia
Now we have a situation in which a MP not elected solely by a majority of the Parliamentary Party but by an immensely larger and undefined group of people could become the British Prime Minister! In reality, Labour Party MPs have no legal or, I assert, moral requirement to accept Jeremy Corbyn as their parliamentary leader.
Interestingly, there are now reports of the New Deputy Labour Leader, Tom Watson, being concerned about Labour MPs’ opposition to Corbyn. SEE: Tom Watson worried about Labour MPs sniping at Jeremy Corbyne
The question is whether Labour MPs have the courage of their personal convictions and will reject the Labour Whip under Corbyn? Were a majority of the current Labour Parliamentary Party to elect another leader, the position of the Labour Party vis-a-vis the two groups of Labour MPs would be far from straightforward.
More seriously, if the practice of electing leaders of the UK’s parliamentary parties by huge and undefined electorates is accepted, there is little to stop it being extended further and being justified with absurd claims of it being greater democracy. Just how will electors in England react if a daft Labour Party invites electors from all parts of the EU to participate in electing its leader . . . all in the cause of greater democracy you understand!
The sad thing is that such a development would be consistent with the absurd machinations of the EU and should not be dismissed lightly. One need only call to mind the unwanted and wasteful, economy distorting butter and beef mountains, the milk and wine lakes (and, more currently, the success of the Schengen Agreement in creating mass migration) to understand that anything bizarre and undesirable is more than possible! Just as the UK enables representatives from small countries with distorted agendas to gain power and ascendancy over a much larger nation, the EU facilitates the same phenomenon on a much larger scale. To think such occurrences are (mis)represented as being ‘democratic’! In a truer democracy, those being governed would be able collectively to rid themselves of such unrepresentative incompetents!