Read on Twitter
The leaked report said there were people in the party machine who would rather wreck the party than see the left win an election. Now, at least one of those people appears to be blackmailing the party with the threat of financial ruin unless it purges the left. 
https://abs.twimg.com/emoji/v2/... draggable="false" alt="đ€" title="Denkendes Gesicht" aria-label="Emoji: Denkendes Gesicht"> https://twitter.com/ta_mills/status/1287352539105636353">https://twitter.com/ta_mills/...
Why do parts of the party right engage in wrecking? Because if the Labour left ever was electorally successful, it would do severe damage to the basis on which the party right claim they must lead the party: that theyâre the most politically skilled and âelectableâ people in it.
A left-led Labour Party with some real prospect of electoral success is, to such people, an even greater danger than one with no such prospect. They have to make their own prophecy come true - the more politically lucid among them realise they *have* to engage in sabotage.
This is the only way to coherently explain the tactically-timed wrecking we saw repeatedly across 2015-20, but especially after June 2017. Psychologically, yes, upset egos, entitlement and so on played a role. But there was a concrete political interest always underlying that.
The possibly irreversible (?) move to OMOV to elect the Labour leader makes it imperative to reduce the weight of the left in the party membership. Back when the leader was chosen only by MPs (until 1981), left-wing members could be used by the PLP & then ignored. Less so now.
It is naturally preferable for the party right if left-wing members exile or purge themselves from the party voluntarily, out of disgust, alienation, etc. It save them the embarrassment, risk, and controversy involved in resorting to more openly repressive methods.
https://twitter.com/leowatkins91/status/1287374005088014336?s=21">https://twitter.com/leowatkin... And if this sounds âparanoidâ, I should stress it took me a long time to realise it myself. It isnât a conclusion I came to eagerly or quickly. But there really canât be any meaningful âunityâ with these people. They can only be fought and defeated. https://twitter.com/leowatkins91/status/1287374005088014336">https://twitter.com/leowatkin...
One metric of success in really changing the Labour Party, then, is the deselection of these people, and their voluntary self-exclusion - whether thatâs followed by them joining the Lib Dems, Tories, or corporate lobbying - as so many of them do when they finish being MPs.
But it isnât the only metric of success. Itâs not enough just to change whoâs in the various party positions. We have to change the structures those positions are in, and the relations between the (small number of) people in formal party positions and the people outside them.
Call it building a Labour Party âfor - and *of* - the many, not the fewâ.
