What are the main differences between the CWI and IMT?
The IMT split from the CWI when that organisation underwent the so-called "open turn", with the majority advocating that the CWI participate in the political process under an independent party, and the minority - which would eventually form the IMT - insisting on strict entryism i.e. working through the Labour Party (and completely misconstruing what entryism was in Trotsky's day, but that's a discussion for another time). Militant founder (Militant being the name of the group that would eventually become the CWI) Grant left for the IMT; the differences today are, I would say, negligible apart from the question of entryism (and I get the impression that the CWI is a bit more "fuzzy" when it comes to theory).
Does the IMT still support entryism into the Labour Party? Do they participate in other partys also? And is the the IMT totally against forming political partys?
I realize that this is late, but I wanted to answer. Apparently, they continue to support entryism into the labor party. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sociali...%28UK,_1992%29 I don't know if they participate in other parties. At least in the US, they support forming a mass labor party. http://www.socialistappeal.org/wil/our-program
Thank you for this info comrade
The difference is tactical. The IMT are Labourite social democrats who reinforce old pillars of capitalism like Her Majesty's Labour and the Second International. The CWI are Labourite social democrats who try to build new, rejuvenated obstacles to workers revolution. Both are about as "Trotskyist" as Stalin was a "Marxist-Leninist."
