Entryism in Corbyn’s Labour

The idea that Trotskyist entryists make up even a significant minority of new Labour members is as baseless now as it was when the story first arose in the summer of 2015. Labour now has over half a million members, more than three times its membership just last year. There are a few thousand Trotskyists around at most. The numbers don’t add up.

There’s still a danger for Labour, not from the raw numbers of extremists but the disproportionate influence they could wield. Their politics may be crude but years of invaluable organising experience makes them far savvier than the average member. They are the ideological ‘true believers’ of the left who are undoubtedly more dedicated and persistent than anyone else.

Casual dismissal of entryism as a potential problem is perhaps unwarranted. But, in light of Tom Watson’s recent warnings about infiltration, as well as the red-baiting pursued in the media by Corbyn’s opponents, a sense of perspective is needed. It would be wrong to equate a potential side effect of the Corbyn phenomenon (entryism) with an explanation of the Corbyn phenomenon itself. As an attempt to characterise and explain Corbyn’s support, it’s worth keeping in mind that entryism is a fairly worthless concept. For Corbyn’s opponents the real danger of entryism may be the danger of comforting illusions. Illusions in this case, that downplay the weaknesses and failures of the anti-Corbyn section of the party, attributing troubles not inward, but to an imaginary far left invasion. It might be soothing but it’s not accurate. Worse, it has served to drag down what should be a really interesting and much-needed debate about why the Labour Party has experienced this unprecedented, completely unforeseen explosion in democratic participation. I can sympathise with their concerns over Corbyn but not their unwillingness to reflect on their own failings, or their modus operandi of demonising his support instead of engaging with it.