The Labour Party

[Rascal]

Watching that you can spot the paid up members of momentum on here easily enough.

Its because it was Labour policy and momentum are the grass roots movement who take the policy on to the streets and social media and campaign on the parties behalf.

Any Labour member whether they are also a member of momentum or not would probably say the same. I say similar and i am not a member of momentum, because i left the organisation.


The Conservative party tried to imitate Momentum with an organisation called Turning Point, it was roundly ridiculed because it tried to be like momentum but was just a bunch of spotty kids who wanked over Johnson and their campaign content was pathetic, funny though because it was piss poor and was soon found to have links with American Libertarian organisations funded by nefarious billionaires.

 

[Rascal]

The reason I used the phrase 'politics of Momentum' is because the organisation itself might not have the same degree of control it once had but its politics still have a huge influence on the party. That's evident by the number of Labour MPs now representing the metropolitan safe-seats Parliament who parrot many of its policies or appear in its promotional videos but might not actually be paid up members of Momentum.

It has never had control, it is a physical impossibility because numbers and many momentum members are also Labour members anyway. Momentum membership peaked at 40k there is no way they can get a majority when there was 500k members.

It is nothing more than a campaign group. This control stuff is utter bullshit.

 

[Fame Monster]

It has never had control, it is a physical impossibility because numbers and many momentum members are also Labour members anyway. Momentum membership peaked at 40k there is no way they can get a majority when there was 500k members.

It is nothing more than a campaign group. This control stuff is utter bullshit.

I'd guess that a lot of voters see Momentum as being more than personnel but policies as well. If that's the case then Momentum had almost full control over the Labour Party because the politics of Momentum and the politics of Labour's front bench between 2015-19 were near indistinguishable whether or not Corbyn or McDonnell or Abbott are actually members of the organisation.

 

[Rascal]

I'd guess that a lot of voters see Momentum as being more than personnel but policies as well. If that's the case then Momentum had almost full control over the Labour Party because the politics of Momentum and the politics of Labour's front bench between 2015-19 were near indistinguishable whether or not Corbyn or McDonnell or Abbott are actually members of the organisation.

How hard is it to understand

The Labour party make policy

Momentum campaign on the policy made by the labour party. Momentums campaigns are THE policies of the Labour party voted on at conference at which it is impossible for momentum to influence because they don't have the numbers or the werewithall to make policy because it is not the remit of momentum to make policy, it campaigns on the policies decided at conference by the Labour Party membership.

Momentum is derided as some sort of militant faction yet do you realise Blair's head of operations John Mcternan is a prominent person in Momentum.

It is a campaign group that campaigns that is all. It is not some sort of Marxist/Leninist revolutionary organisation it is just like the Fabian society or Labour First or any other number of Labour affiliates. It is portrayed though as it is something it is not in the RW media because if it undermines momentum it undermines by association the very Policies that the Labour Party have decided upon at conference.

 

[Fame Monster]

How hard is it to understand

The Labour party make policy

Momentum campaign on the policy made by the labour party. Momentums campaigns are THE policies of the Labour party voted on at conference at which it is impossible for momentum to influence because they don't have the numbers or the werewithall to make policy because it is not the remit of momentum to make policy, it campaigns on the policies decided at conference by the Labour Party membership.

Momentum is derided as some sort of militant faction yet do you realise Blair's head of operations John Mcternan is a prominent person in Momentum.

It is a campaign group that campaigns that is all. It is not some sort of Marxist/Leninist revolutionary organisation it is just like the Fabian society or Labour First or any other number of Labour affiliates. It is portrayed though as it is something it is not in the RW media because if it undermines momentum it undermines by association the very Policies that the Labour Party have decided upon at conference.

I'm sorry Rascal but that's nonsense. Momentum campaign on what Labour Party policy should be, not on what the Labour Party have already decided. If they don't like what's been decided, they throw their toys out the pram like we're seeing since Starmer got chosen as leader.

 

[blueinsa]

I'm sorry Rascal but that's nonsense. Momentum campaign on what Labour Party policy should be, not on what the Labour Party have already decided. If they don't like what's been decided, they throw their toys out the pram like we're seeing since Starmer got chosen as leader.

My take on it as well.

How many of the NEC are Momentum?

 

[Rascal]

I'm sorry Rascal but that's nonsense. Momentum campaign on what Labour Party policy should be, not on what the Labour Party have already decided. If they don't like what's been decided, they throw their toys out the pram like we're seeing since Starmer got chosen as leader.

Mcternan is a Starmer supporter. He was Blair's man. You really haven't a clue what momentum is at all.

Can you give me one instance of Momentum campaigning on anything that was not Labour party policy?

You see for some reason that is beyond me that Momentum are on the left of the party, that is not true, it has members from across all the wings/factions of the Labour party. It is a grass roots campaigning organisation. It produces content based ON labour party policy.

This is Momentum's mission statement

"The Labour Party must be transformed into a more open, democratic, member-led party that’s ready to win elections. Whether it’s local or national elections, Momentum believes ordinary people should be front-and-centre of getting Labour into power.


To make that happen, the Labour Party needs to embrace changes to how decisions are made and improve inclusion of its diverse membership. We see Labour’s Democracy Review as an important vehicle to reflect on its current democratic structures as it gives ordinary party members a chance to have their say.

Momentum is convening a movement-wide response to the review and we encourage as many Labour members as possible to get involved. No matter where you are or what you do, if you’re a Labour member, you have the right to share your views."

The Labour party is made up of many organisations, from the Trade Unions, the Fabians, Labour First, JVL, Labour List, Momentum, the Co-Op society and it is quite possible to be a member of all or none and still be a Party member. All these organisations have a right to vote and campaign on what policies Labour endorse but i repeat because of numbers no single organisation has a majority. The Trade Unions used to have the biggest say until OMOV was introduced and since then it is down to members to decide. This is because the Labour party is a Democratic party.

It has a wide range of activities that encourage Labour party members to get involved with because it is a grass roots campaigning organisation that campaigns ON Labour party policy.

To think it campaigns against Labour party policy is utter nonsense. Its desperate nonsense thrown about because of a lack of understanding of what the organisation actually is.

This is where Momentum stand on the Labour Party

"The Labour Party must be transformed into a more open, democratic, member-led party that’s ready to win elections. Whether it’s local or national elections, Momentum believes ordinary people should be front-and-centre of getting Labour into power."

This is where Momentum stand on Community

"Power and the ideas needed to solve local issues are rooted within our communities, with ordinary people and activists. Together, we have the skills, energy and resolve to transform where we live from the grassroots up – and inspire others to do the same.


Through connecting people, running training and sharing resources, we can campaign to make our neighbourhoods better for the many not the few – and we can build power in the process. Uniting, organising and showing solidarity with people fighting for fairness and equality is the way we win positive, lasting change.

Campaigning at the local level can take lots of forms. From standing with low-paid workers to win the Living Wage, to coming together to prevent services from closing, community members should be empowered to organise. After all, where we live affects how well we live, and no-one else knows our neighbourhoods as well as we do. Which is why strengthening community power is vital in our aim to transform the country for the better"

How anybody seriously thinks Momentum somehow run the Labour Party or indeed have the largest say is beyond stupidity. It is impossible for it to do so because i repeat...NUMBERS.


As for throwing toys out of the pram, it is some on the left who are an homogenous blob from across the Labour affiliates who have come to the conclusion that Starmer is not the man. The left will draw people from across all Labour affiliates plus some outside the party structures as well. It is the lefts choice to decide Starmer is not the man, just as the majority of the PLP decided that Corbyn was not there man, but it is the members who decide not the affiliates because i repeat again... NUMBERS.

If you seriously think that Momentum will campaign against Starmer then you are seriously deluded. They will campaign ON labour party policy whether they agree with it entirely or not. Because believe it or not i didnt agree with everything Corbyn stood for, because i have a brain and i think for myself. That is how a democratic party works, you can of course dissent, because dissent is part of democracy. The Labour Party is not a dictatorship, although to be fair a lot feel like Starmer is acting like one at the moment.

I don't even know why i am defending Momentum to be honest, i left the organisation about 3 years ago as i didnt believe it would ever change anything for the better because of and i repeat NUMBERS. But to think that Momentum operates outside of the Labour party interests and indeed against Labour party interests is just wrong.

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

How hard is it to understand

The Labour party make policy

Momentum campaign on the policy made by the labour party. Momentums campaigns are THE policies of the Labour party voted on at conference at which it is impossible for momentum to influence because they don't have the numbers or the werewithall to make policy because it is not the remit of momentum to make policy, it campaigns on the policies decided at conference by the Labour Party membership.

Momentum is derided as some sort of militant faction yet do you realise Blair's head of operations John Mcternan is a prominent person in Momentum.

It is a campaign group that campaigns that is all. It is not some sort of Marxist/Leninist revolutionary organisation it is just like the Fabian society or Labour First or any other number of Labour affiliates. It is portrayed though as it is something it is not in the RW media because if it undermines momentum it undermines by association the very Policies that the Labour Party have decided upon at conference.

 

[Rascal]

And the point is?

 

[Gareth Barry Conlon]

And the point is?

Alan Johnson describes Momentum as 'John and his Cult' 'a party within a party', 'I want them gone'. He was absolutely bang on then and he its still right today. Corbyn was a disaster and all Momentun aim to do is serve up some one of his ilk again.

Labour risk becoming an irrelevant side show. These people need to leave the party and form there own full blown socialist movement if that is what they want. Labour has been and should be a moderate left of centre alternative to the tories, when it is that it wins elections and we as a country will be much better for it.

 

[Rascal]

Alan Johnson describes Momentum as 'John and his Cult' 'a party within a party', 'I want them gone'. He was absolutely bang on then and he its still right today. Corbyn was a disaster and all Momentun aim to do is serve up some one of his ilk again.

Labour risk becoming an irrelevant side show. These people need to leave the party and form there own full blown socialist movement if that is what they want. Labour has been and should be a moderate left of centre alternative to the tories, when it is that it wins elections and we as a country will be much better for it.

Attila the Hun is to the left of Alan Johnson. Remember he was anti-Corbyn and one of those who enabled the Tory government, so absolutely no surprise to see him saying that at all.

As for wanting Momentum gone, who does he expect to campaign, i know he was a former Postman, so is he going to get out on the streets and deliver leaflets. Is he fuck. He showed what a miserable campaigner he is himself by his woeful leading of the Pro-EU campaign.

Why don't the centrists leave the party after all Labour is a Democratic Socialist party and not a Social Democratic party.

Blair was possibly the only right wing Labour leader of note, he is now reviled by virtually everyone apart from the narrow cabal of Blairites like Alan Johnson.

As for moderate how would you describe moderate.

Are you in favour of neo-liberal economics?
Are you in favour of free markets?
Do you support nationalisation of vital utilities?
Do you support the NHS?
Are you a fan of welfare reform?

Do you realise that since Thatcher introduced Neo-liberalism to the UK and Blair carried on with it that the UK is now the most unequal country in the western world. It has levels of poverty not seen in Europe since the Berlin Wall fell and Germany was reunited and found the Ost to be poverty stricken. Do you realise that the UK has levels of inequality worse than the state of Alabama which is the poorest state in the USA.

We don't need moderates, we need a fucking revolution, the country is falling to bits around us under the worst leadership in living memory, we face massive new austerity measures because of Covid and corruption is rife.

And you want moderate, all moderate will do is temper the extremes it wont make a difference to those with nothing, it will as always serve the capitalist elite just as the Labour moderates under Blair did with their crass acceptance of Thatcherite reforms and idiotically sticking to Tory spending plans. Blair and the moderates are as much to blame as Thatcher for the state of the nation and you want them to have another go at fucking the nation up.

God fucking helps us.

 

[Mazzarelli's Swiss Cheese]

Attila the Hun is to the left of Alan Johnson. Remember he was anti-Corbyn and one of those who enabled the Tory government, so absolutely no surprise to see him saying that at all.

As for wanting Momentum gone, who does he expect to campaign, i know he was a former Postman, so is he going to get out on the streets and deliver leaflets. Is he fuck. He showed what a miserable campaigner he is himself by his woeful leading of the Pro-EU campaign.

Why don't the centrists leave the party after all Labour is a Democratic Socialist party and not a Social Democratic party.

Blair was possibly the only right wing Labour leader of note, he is now reviled by virtually everyone apart from the narrow cabal of Blairites like Alan Johnson.

As for moderate how would you describe moderate.

Are you in favour of neo-liberal economics?
Are you in favour of free markets?
Do you support nationalisation of vital utilities?
Do you support the NHS?
Are you a fan of welfare reform?

Do you realise that since Thatcher introduced Neo-liberalism to the UK and Blair carried on with it that the UK is now the most unequal country in the western world. It has levels of poverty not seen in Europe since the Berlin Wall fell and Germany was reunited and found the Ost to be poverty stricken. Do you realise that the UK has levels of inequality worse than the state of Alabama which is the poorest state in the USA.

We don't need moderates, we need a fucking revolution, the country is falling to bits around us under the worst leadership in living memory, we face massive new austerity measures because of Covid and corruption is rife.

And you want moderate, all moderate will do is temper the extremes it wont make a difference to those with nothing, it will as always serve the capitalist elite just as the Labour moderates under Blair did with their crass acceptance of Thatcherite reforms and idiotically sticking to Tory spending plans. Blair and the moderates are as much to blame as Thatcher for the state of the nation and you want them to have another go at fucking the nation up.

God fucking helps us.

The whole idea is to move the overton window to the right, demonise the left as extreme and maintain the status quo - then we can all take pride in being 'moderate' and preventing any change.

 

[Rascal]

The whole idea is to move the overton window to the right, demonise the left as extreme and maintain the status quo - then we can all take pride in being 'moderate' and preventing any change.

It has been the mission of the right since probably the end of the 60s, start of the 70s when think tanks started proliferating. They were fed up of the post WW2 social consensus as that distributed wealth downwards and the think tanks funded by capitalists started the change to move wealth upwards. Hence Neo Liberalism, supply side economics, free markets, the demonisation of Socialism. Inch by inch they have moved the Overton window rightwards and now even moderate Labour looks like Stalinism and the far right populists look moderately right wing. I never had an issue with One Nation Conservatism as that had a social conscience, i didnt agree with it, but i knew they had good intentions, now a one nation conservative is demonised as being left wing such is the movement of the window.

And little me a Socialist looks like i have horns growing out of my head because i dare to want to things my father expected and my grandad prayed for.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Had a watch of some of his EU campaign performances and it was exactly the same tone as his paid skits on "This Week". You would have been better off with a paper boy.

What has he done since he left parliament, other than to make paid appearances on ITV?

He put more passion into his ITV rant than anything he did on the EU referendum campaign, where he simply aped Cameron's talking points.

 

[Mr Kobayashi]

Attila the Hun is to the left of Alan Johnson. Remember he was anti-Corbyn and one of those who enabled the Tory government, so absolutely no surprise to see him saying that at all.

As for wanting Momentum gone, who does he expect to campaign, i know he was a former Postman, so is he going to get out on the streets and deliver leaflets. Is he fuck. He showed what a miserable campaigner he is himself by his woeful leading of the Pro-EU campaign.

Why don't the centrists leave the party after all Labour is a Democratic Socialist party and not a Social Democratic party.

Have to disagree there Russ, there is nothing wrong with continental style social democracy that believe in a strong and functioning welfare state. The "moderate" third-way variation that pretends to be social democracy would be a misguided and backwards step. There is nothing to be gained in the long-run from strapping yourself in with the interests of financial capital and offering out crumbs of welfare patronage to voters, which you will eventually have to get rid of when the bankers create another crash, bail them out and put in place austerity measures.

Bringing back anti-trust protection, labour protection and even pushing important companies to delist from the stock market could all be achieved under a left-leaning coalition.

Labour works best as a broad church- some of the most important reforms of the last half-century came about because of more liberal elements in the labour party. Roy Jenkin's stubborn determination to bring in the 1967 "permissive society" reforms: abolition of the death penalty, decriminalisation of abortion, homosexuality and prostitution (thereby reducing police corruption). In the same period the Race Relations act sprouted from the left-wing of the party.

All of those reforms were unpopular in wider society, within parliament and the labour party itself.

Polls in the 1960s and 1970s showed that Powell's views were popular among the British population at the time.[34] A Gallup poll, for example, showed that 75% of the population were sympathetic to Powell's views.[35] An NOP poll showed that approximately 75% of the British population agreed with Powell's demand for non-white immigration to be halted completely, and about 60% agreed with his inflammatory call for the repatriation of non-whites already resident in Britain.[34]

Rivers of Blood speech - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

They had the strength of their convictions though, not Blair's obsessive interest in controlling the news headlines and doing things to claim victories. He could have spent some more political capital and legalised same sex marriage rather than his watered down civil partnerships leave it for the party of section 28 to do it.

They could have done much more in that period, (particularly reshaping the economy) and the fact that they didn't with the majorities they had should shame anyone trying to push this daft moderate liberal side of capital approach. That was exactly the role of the Whigs/Liberals before universal enfranchisement.

Some interesting discussion of Starmer's past expressed views in SA here. Hopefully he has those values and hasn't sold out/abandoned them like the masked postman.

Starmer's Socialist Alternatives - The Social Review

Musing on the future of the Labour Party in 1986, one twenty-four-year-old activist denounced centrism, insisting that the future lay with the grassroots Left. “Instead of heading towards an SDP Mark II”, he wrote, “we would be better to go forward to re-build and develop the party as an...

www.thesocialreview.co.uk

 

[Rascal]

Have to disagree there Russ, there is nothing wrong with continental style social democracy that believe in a strong and functioning welfare state. The "moderate" third-way variation that pretends to be social democracy would be a misguided and backwards step. There is nothing to be gained in the long-run from strapping yourself in with the interests of financial capital and offering out crumbs of welfare patronage to voters, which you will eventually have to get rid of when the bankers create another crash, bail them out and put in place austerity measures.

Bringing back anti-trust protection, labour protection and even pushing important companies to delist from the stock market could all be achieved under a left-leaning coalition.

Labour works best as a broad church- some of the most important reforms of the last half-century came about because of more liberal elements in the labour party. Roy Jenkin's stubborn determination to bring in the 1967 "permissive society" reforms: abolition of the death penalty, decriminalisation of abortion, homosexuality and prostitution (thereby reducing police corruption). In the same period the Race Relations act sprouted from the left-wing of the party.

All of those reforms were unpopular in wider society, within parliament and the labour party itself.

Rivers of Blood speech - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

They had the strength of their convictions though, not Blair's obsessive interest in controlling the news headlines and doing things to claim victories. He could have spent some more political capital and legalised same sex marriage rather than his watered down civil partnerships leave it for the party of section 28 to do it.

They could have done much more in that period, (particularly reshaping the economy) and the fact that they didn't with the majorities they had should shame anyone trying to push this daft moderate liberal side of capital approach. That was exactly the role of the Whigs/Liberals before universal enfranchisement.

Some interesting discussion of Starmer's past expressed views in SA here. Hopefully he has those values and hasn't sold out/abandoned them like the masked postman.

Starmer's Socialist Alternatives - The Social Review

Musing on the future of the Labour Party in 1986, one twenty-four-year-old activist denounced centrism, insisting that the future lay with the grassroots Left. “Instead of heading towards an SDP Mark II”, he wrote, “we would be better to go forward to re-build and develop the party as an...

www.thesocialreview.co.uk

Nice post.

I voted for Blair having spent my formative years under the Witches rule, I witnessed the cruelty of her policies. At 18 I had to sign on because there were no jobs, the ironic thing was we signed on at the Labour Club because the numbers that were having to sign on had overwhelmed the dole office. People queued out of the door for an hour to sign on every week. It was heartbreaking not so much for me I was a kid, but for the older lads thrown out of work and worrying about their futures and how to feed the family. I will never forgive Thatcher for what she did and the economic polices she chose to enforce on the UK. Blair to me at the time was the promised land, I had never known a left wing government. To see that promise thrown away when he had so much political capital destroyed my faith in moderate Labour for good. He could have achieved so much and left me feeling hugely underwhelmed. I educated myself on politics, i am still learning about politics and i will probably still be learning about politics to the day that I die and I never ever want to see the likes of Thatcher or Johnson for that matter inflicted on this country, I never want to see another moderate Labour government either. The more I read the more Left wing I become, the more I see the need for Social Justice, the greater my desire is for equality of opportunity and the more I despise the leeches of the Capitalist class. I don't want to be treated better than anybody else, i want to be treated the same as everybody else. I want people to be proud of their country because I am proud of my country, I want people to have a roof over their head, a full belly, a job, a life with respect earned and a life that is full of cultural enrichment. I want these things for everybody not just for me, I am a council estate kid who never had the opportunity others had, but they are not my betters, nor am I better than them. I want our kids to grow up in a world that is safe, full of opportunity and fair, I want them to be able to have a home of their own and a job worth having, I want them to love our country and be proud of our country. I want them to enjoy the benefits of being British. I dont want to see our kids in that Labour club witnessing the despair I witnessed, I don't want our kids to go hungry for the sake of a few quid, I want our kids to grow and be happy, to read and enjoy the theatre, love music and enjoy sport. I want them to be educated to the highest possible standard each and every kid can attain without them being subjected to arbitrary discrimination based on class distinction. I want the Working class to love each other and show solidarity like my Nanna did when her neighbours would borrow a cup of sugar or a knob of butter because people looked out for each other.

I don't mind people being wealthy as long they pay their fair share of tax, i am genuinely pleased to see my friends do well and buy nice things and decent houses and new cars, I don't want that to stop, I want our kids to have that chance too. I don't want people to feel marginalised because they are different, I abhor discrimination in any form, I despise racists and those who support it because if we were one and showed solidarity with each other we could achieve so much more.

My Socialism is rooted in community, it is about solidarity with each other and looking after each other when times are hard, yes I believe the state should be the foundation of that solidarity as the state can provide opportunity and legislate to ensure we have equality of opportunity. I do believe the people have the right to own vital resources as they should not be owned by a single entity as they are all our resources and we should make sure they are allocated properly so everyone does have a decent affordable house, never has to worry about keeping warm, or feeding themselves. I don't think the market achieves these things because the drive for profit destroys solidarity it pits us against each other and causes disharmony amongst our peers. I hate how we as a society have become obsessed with somebody having more than ourselves when we should be congratulating them on their achievements or making sure they have some quality of life if they are unable to achieve.

My ideals are around collectivism, i think it is an inherent human trait to be collaborative, we work better when we work with others. We are social animals and rampant individualism is i feel against the natural order. Socialism should be about togetherness and solidarity with each other and wanting what is best for all men and women and not just a select few based on outdated privilige. A person born into wealth should be given the same opportunity to a person born in Wythenshawe and then they can earn their status/privilige's based on ability/talent rather than on accident of birth. Capitalism and Conservatism to some degree work against what i believe to be the natural order and it respects wealth over achievement, it respects property over people and it respects profit over paucity. That has to be tempered for every ones sake, inequality is the bane of UK society and its not just about wealth it is about regional inequality as well. I hate that our city does not get the same consideration that London gets, it is wrong that the capital draws wealth from the north and the centralisation of power is against my community based ideological Socialist principles. We should have power over our own local decisions, we know our people and what is important to Manchester is not necessarily what is important to Mansfield or Muswell Hill.

The Labour party should be the party of the working class, it should champion the working class causes, it should campaign for the betterment of the working class. It shouldn't want to make the working class the dominant class, i have not drifted that far left just yet, but it should want for the working class to be equal partners in the nation and represent the working classes needs, desires, hopes and dreams. The party shouldn't be a party for sale to wealthy donors, it should be a party of grass roots activists campaigning for the betterment of the whole of the country and for all the people of the country.

Whether Starmer is the man for the job I would like to see being undertaken I have my severe doubts. I do seriously hope that I am wrong and he proves me wrong and makes me look like a muppet because nothing would please me more than to be proved wrong and for him to banish those pictures in my mind of that queue at the local Labour Club.

 

[Rascal]

This is a quite superb contribution from Howard Beckett, Unite Asst General Secretary:




Chapeau.

 

[Vic]

The last Labour government obviously raised many people out of poverty. Increased disparity of wealth (if that's "inequality") was a separate issue.

Labour's record on inequality and social mobility: 1997 to 2010 – Full Fact

In a video on Labour's inequality record Tony Blair lists statistics on topics from the NHS to poverty. The figures are all broadly correct, but also don't include overall income inequality.

fullfact.org

I'm not even sure if the Overton index is a reliable thing any more. Think how many Labour policies got into Tory minds even before Covid. (They're still lower than vermin.)

Breaking the Overton Window

An FT editorial declared last year that divisions between left and right no longer explain how voters think. In September Intelligence Squared ran a debate on Britain’s Political Identity Cri…

flipchartfairytales.wordpress.com

 

[Ancient Citizen]

Alan Johnson describes Momentum as 'John and his Cult' 'a party within a party', 'I want them gone'. He was absolutely bang on then and he its still right today. Corbyn was a disaster and all Momentun aim to do is serve up some one of his ilk again.

Labour risk becoming an irrelevant side show. These people need to leave the party and form there own full blown socialist movement if that is what they want. Labour has been and should be a moderate left of centre alternative to the tories, when it is that it wins elections and we as a country will be much better for it.

Exactly this.
Unfortunately for Labour, them leaving and forming a socialist party, as this is
what they want, won't happen, as they know that propounding this philosophy
would see them gone completely. So, like the defunct Militant Tendency, they stay in Labour hoping to introduce yet another Corbyn to push their beliefs.
The only Labour administration that lasted was indeed a moderate centre left party, and managed to capture the essential 'Middle England' and floating voters, unless they revert back to this model, they'll never be in government.

 

[Rascal]

Exactly this.
Unfortunately for Labour, them leaving and forming a socialist party, as this is
what they want, won't happen, as they know that propounding this philosophy
would see them gone completely. So, like the defunct Militant Tendency, they stay in Labour hoping to introduce yet another Corbyn to push their beliefs.
The only Labour administration that lasted was indeed a moderate centre left party, and managed to capture the essential 'Middle England' and floating voters, unless they revert back to this model, they'll never be in government.

Are you seriously comparing a Trotskyite group with people who deliver leaflets.

Seriously.