Letter: Party represents the majority

But I thought it necessary to respond to Mr Sylvester, who also seems to makes things up as he goes along. The suggestion that the Labour Party is simply a “rabble” that prefers to indulge in internal disputes rather than solving society’s problems misunderstands the current dynamics of UK politics. The majority in society are suffering the effects of the economic crisis that started in 2007/8 and continues to this day. There are a minority of very wealthy people that are not suffering, and they have the Tories and the Labour right wing in their pockets — they are the establishment, and they include those that control the levers of the economy, and the mainstream media.

The Labour Party was created to represent the majority of people in society — the working class, that suffer under the policies of the Tories and the establishment. The working class always pays for the mistakes of the establishment, as now with austerity that rips away vital pubic services, social security, wages, employment benefits, job security, and democratic freedoms, all with the (failed) goal of paying off a national debt that was created by the establishment (eg. bankers, and governments that failed to regulate them) while also providing opportunities for those same people to increase the profits on their already vast personal wealth.

The only way a mass political party can change society to benefit the majority is for the policies to be formed by those many people that suffer on a daily basis the effects of failed government policies.

The privileged establishment will not do this, because to benefit the majority means to restrict the ability of the one per cent to take and hoard the nation's wealth at the expense of the 99pc. This is the essence of the current struggle in the Labour Party.

The membership, the vast majority of which support Corbyn and his democratic and socialist policies that favour the whole of society, are enthusiastically getting involved with this extremely positive democratic process, putting Labour back in the hands of the people; the working class; me and you; the vast majority of society, especially in places like Rotherham — so that we can change things.

Momentum is an organisation that completely supports this process, and aims to get more people involved in politics, particularly those that are disengaged from politics because they feel left behind by the typical establishment politicians. Momentum is very inclusive, and has regular open and public meetings that welcome new people to give them the opportunity to engage in politics.

For Mr Sylvester’s benefit, “open” and “public” meetings mean that anybody can attend. I’m actively involved in Momentum Rotherham and it has never invited anybody personally on Facebook, but with public events other people are able to send invites to their friends — maybe that’s where his misunderstanding comes from.

For a broad and inclusive democratic outlook, Momentum has open, public meetings so that supporters of any political party can come along and have a political discussion (even if they cannot all be members). Claims of “entryism” are just hysterical scaremongering. Anybody can “enter” these meetings. Why would socialists be barred, especially since neoliberalists are not?

Daniel Platts, Kingsbrook Chase, Wath-Upon Dearne