Splits and fusions in left parties: lessons from the early 1980s

Lessons for Today, especially from the Partido Revolucionario de los Trabajadores

May 30, 2025

Revolutionary organizations frequently grapple with the complex questions of how to unite forces, when to differentiate, and how to build effective leadership capable of guiding the working class and its allies. These are not abstract debates, but are intrinsically linked to the dynamics of class struggle, the effectiveness of existing leaderships, and the need for strategic clarity.

The Imperative of a Workers' Party

The experience in Mexico highlights the existence of the Mexican PRT (Partido Revolucionario de los Trabajadores - Revolutionary Workers Party), which attracted a significant number of supporters to its convention. The PRT in Mexico ran presidential and parliamentary candidates in the July 1982 elections, with Ricardo Zamora as their presidential candidate. The PRT had been part of the Democratic Front for Presidential Election, formed in February 1978. This context underscores the broader theme of the necessity for a workers' party, echoed in other national contexts like Argentina and Southern Africa. This necessity arises from the working class's fundamental challenge: a persistent shortage of effective and trusted leadership capable of navigating complex political landscapes and confronting the power of capital and the state.

Renewing Leadership Amidst Struggle

In periods when the working class and the masses are moving forward and engaging in struggles, there is a natural tendency towards the reorganisation and renewal of leadership, particularly within unions and social movements. Workers gain confidence in their own strength through these initiatives. This process can also expose the limitations of existing bureaucratic or reformist leaderships.

The presence of a united revolutionary force, or a "united revolutionary pole," can potentially accelerate this renewal process. Such a pole can provide anti-capitalist answers and strategic perspectives that existing leaderships often lack, offering a clear alternative to reformist or class-collaborationist approaches.

Obstacles to Unity and Effective Leadership

Numerous obstacles stand in the way of building unity and effective leadership. Sectarianism among different revolutionary groups is a significant barrier, hindering joint work and unification possibilities. Some organisations may prefer a stance of pure propagandism, focusing on their own political proposals rather than actively participating in mass organisations or united fronts, thereby limiting their ability to connect with and influence the broader movement. Others demonstrate an inability to respond to changes in the world or may be unduly influenced by external directives rather than the concrete needs of the class struggle in their own country. A lack of internal democracy within organisations can also pose a problem for unification efforts.

Forging Unity Through Common Experience

Despite these challenges, common experience in working blocs, united fronts, and alliances creates the motivation, trust, and momentum to build unity. These alliances, built based on concrete struggles and shared demands, are seen as essential tactics for fighting the common enemy and mobilizing the masses. Whether in election campaigns (Mexico, July 1982), solidarity initiatives (Solidarity in Poland, 1981-1983), or industrial action (Belgian strikes, early 1982; Brazilian general strikes, 1983; Italian strikes, 1983), working together fosters a spirit of unity and a general understanding of the need for solidarity. The PRT in Mexico, for instance, stated its desire to combine efforts with all revolutionaries through common work and fronts, hoping this could lead to the convergence of organizations where programmatic and political homogeneity allows for unification. Similarly, in Guatemala, revolutionary organizations united in the URNG in February 1982.

Defining "Red Lines" for Alliances

Revolutionary organizations need clear "red lines" to guide their participation in alliances and determine when to break them. A key principle consistently emphasized is the necessity of class independence and the rejection of class collaborationist policies. Forming "common permanent political fronts" or participating in governmental alternatives with the bourgeoisie or parties linked to bourgeois ideology is seen as compromising revolutionary goals and limiting mass mobilization. Alliances should not come at the price of putting the brake on the mobilisation and self-organisation of the workers and poor peasants for their own interests. The crisis of the MIR government in Bolivia, which took office in October 1982 and faced a growing crisis by November 1982, is discussed as an example where fissures appeared in a class-collaborationist alliance due to its policies.

Fragmentation and the Vanguard's Role

The timing and justification for fragmentation or splits are also critical considerations. Fragmentation can indeed be damaging, dispersing energy and weakening the movement, unless it is connected to new energies or a genuine realignment within the mass movement, such as within the unions. Fragmentation can arise from the crisis of existing parties or movements, but also from the failure of leadership to provide an effective program or their attempts to slow down a developing movement, in which case "several centers will appear." The vanguard must clearly understand the reasons for differentiation or splits to be beneficial or necessary. The crisis and limitations of traditional parties in countries like Spain (around March and October 1982) and Italy (around March 1982 and early 1983), and the need for revolutionary forces to work with sectors emerging from such crises or differentiation processes are important considerations. The emergence of new coordinating bodies or currents in unions (like the underground structures in Poland, 1981-1983 or the new national labour confederation in Brazil, March 1982) can also signal a realignment that necessitates a different organizational approach. The fundamental need is to build a vanguard capable of providing the political leadership required by the developing mass movement and ensuring its class independence.