August 20, 2026

New response from the FLTI:

The leadership of the MPR in Brazil (formerly PSTU-LIT) continues to march in place… the place of Stalinism

On August 10th, the leadership of the MPR responded again to a letter published by our current on July 23rd, in which we responded to the accusations of all kinds made against us by the leaders of the MPR in Brazil.
Our comrades there had participated in a public plenary session calling to set up a “new revolutionary party” in Brazil. They had
been invited, as has been fully documented.
After that, they were accused of all kinds of profanities and even of trying “to do entryism" (sic) and of breaking up the MPR.

The debate deserves to end. The positions are clear. This position will go public, as we did with the previous one, in our written materials. We will even publish the harsh methodological attacks against us made by the MPR leadership so that vanguard workers can verify the truth of what we are stating here.

As we mentioned, the MPR had issued a public call to discuss the “building of a revolutionary party with organizations that claim to represent the working class and oppose not only the capitalists and their governments in power, but also reformism and all sorts of class alliances.” How could our comrades in Brazil, who are fighting to build a revolutionary party as a reflection of our struggle to refound the Fourth International, not be part of that plenary session? They attended, with our program.
After this, a witch hunt began. What is it that bothers the leadership of the MPR so much about the Trotskyist program?

Throughout their entire response letter, the MPR doesn't raise a single programmatic difference with our current. They put forward unfounded methodological accusations, slanders, amalgams, etc. They offer no programmatic discussion whatsoever.
Moreover, it is still not clear something that the leadership of the MPR has been promising to publish it for months, namely the program and platform that led them to break with the majority of the PSTU, beyond the issue of democratic-centralism, which they have transformed into a panacea above Marxist theory and program.

Really, they do not raise any programmatic points on the Palestinian question, nor on the war in Iran, or on the split of several layers of the working class with the "Democratic Socialists" of America, which seek to subject the militant vanguard to the Democratic Party of the Wall Street pirates.
They don't put forward any program on the Ukrainian question, on the crisis in the European Union, on the Chinese question, on the mass uprisings in Bolivia and Peru against the US colonial offensive. Nothing. No international program. Not a single word. We’re sure they're busy discussing who to vote for in the next elections…

Let's clarify something quickly: calling for the formation of a revolutionary party in Brazil without an international stance and a clear strategy for fighting for refounding the Fourth International is to refuse to establishing a Trotskyist force in that country. It's basic national-Trotskyism.

We were able to watch a video of Martín Hernández, one of the leaders of the MPR, about the "battles" that he allegedly has been waging for some time within the PSTU, and everything we heard were methodological criticisms about the number of paid party operatives, the problem of democratic centralism, etc. It surprised us, but not in a good way. Now it's clear.

For us, a current can be honest or not, either awful or not, according to the program it puts forward and fights for among the masses. Moreover, the centralist-democratic regime, according to Lenin and Trotsky, is determined by the program for which a current claiming to be Marxist fights.
The decomposition of the party regime of an organization is nothing more than the refraction of capitulations and programmatic adaptation to the bourgeois regime and the treacherous leaderships of the proletariat.

It seems almost not true that long-time leaders in the Trotskyist movement ignore the theory and program of Permanent Revolution, which addresses precisely this point in its 14th thesis, in opposition to the program of the Communist International under Stalin and Bukharin. There it states: “The struggle of the Communist Left Opposition for a correct policy and a healthy regime in the Communist lnternational is inseparably bound up with the struggle for the Marxist programme...”

If the regime of a current becomes unbearable, it means that it is degenerating politically and programmatically.
In the case of the MPR, its revolutionary construction will fail because it does not start from the premise that the struggle between Stalinism and Trotskyism, between reformists and revolutionaries, is, was and will be an international struggle, where the world economy and politics determine the national conditions.
The MPR leadership remains completely silent about this. It merely calls for the founding of a “revolutionary party” in Brazil…
MPR leadership says nothing about its international tasks and obligations, aside from attempting to resume relations with groups that broke away from the LIT. It is silent about the program to refound the Fourth International. It does not say a word about the historical balance on LIT’s splintering in the ‘90s (when it split in 20 pieces) and now, in Brazil.
Therefore, the leadership of the MPR is in a state of tension, based on political impotence.

We really expected a break of relations with the MPR based on programmatic differences. To be honest, we've been surprised by the brutality of this faction.
The FLTI has a clear Marxist program and theoretical production, even if the MPR leaders don’t like it. We have an entire publishing house with all the books our small current has published and produced on Marxism, war and revolution, in which we directly intervened. You can go and study them if you wish to learn about our positions. Discuss them.

Where you have raised a program point is in the merger agreement you sealed with a current in Brazil called the Revolutionary Socialist Movement (MRS), which we know perfectly well.
This faction critically adheres to the PKK, that is, the Kurdish Communist Party of Syria, and openly to the YPG, its armed wing, which yesterday fought alongside al-Assad and Putin against the Syrian revolutionary masses and handed Rojava and Kobani over to the US, which established nine military bases there. Under the leadership of the PKK and the YPG, the Kurdish people were subjected to the US and the massacres imposed by Zionism throughout the Middle East. Or did anyone see any action by the Kurdish bourgeoisie in support of the Palestinian masses? Meanwhile, in the MRS headquarters, they are celebrating the merger with the MPR with YPG flags, the same YPG that marches alongside US troops in northern Syria, guarding the oil wells the latter plunder.

It is clear: your method to relate with Trotskyist currents is one of brutal and ruthless methodological attack, while with groups loyal to Stalinism, you do make "pacts of loyalty and unity".

We, the FLTI, honestly, would never join the MPR— which has merged with a faction allied to the Stalinist PKK and the YPG, who have already joined al-Jolani's unified army under US instructions. This says it all.
We consider that current with which the MPR has just merged to be an awful current, not because of this or that methodological problem, but because of it making unprincipled agreements with Stalinist currents that yesterday supported al-Assad and today support al-Jolani in Syria and Zionism, as do the Kurdish bourgeoisie and Stalinism, no matter how much they want to peddle the "communes of Rojava", which in reality, as we have already said, are under US command.

Sixteen of our martyrs from the Leon Sedov Brigade have fallen on the battlefield of the Syrian revolution. We are the only Trotskyist current rooted in the Middle East that has proudly participated in the civil war. And you? You are with one of the executioners of the Syrian people who rose up against Assad.

What do you mean by “building ourselves just to snatch two or three militants for “our sect,” as you claim, from the decomposed tendencies of the renegades of Trotskyism? We're still waiting for your condolences to the Trotskyists who fell on the battlefields of the Middle East, deeply rooted in the masses and not watching from afar, but at the forefront of their struggles. You and the entire reformist left looked the other way and pretend not to notice.
This was happening while most of the international left, and the Argentine left in particular, were embracing Assad, Putin, and the pro-Zionist Kurdish movement in Syria. You need to explain to the masses the merger you've made with the MRS, which is dangling to the YPG boots, who are under the command of the US and al-Jolani, and are allies of Zionism.

It never occurred to us that we could enter the MPR. We could however converge or not, opening a public debate about the agreements and differences. The MPR is a movement with extensive experience in entryism. Why are you hiding this? You were inside Lula’s PT for years and years, practically “without exiting”.

For Trotskyism, entryism is a short-term tactic carried out within mass parties when sectors of the masses move politically from right to left, and not within small groups like the MPR.

The struggle of small Marxist nuclei to reach the masses is the open political struggle. For instance, you didn't even realize it, but you accuse the FLTI of entryist, of establishing relationships to snatch two or three militants, when in our letter we propose you exactly the opposite. When we received your note of August 10th, we looked at each other in astonishment and wondered: Did these people even read our letter? In it, to demonstrate that our policy has nothing to do with snatching militants but to have a loyal programmatic debate before the masses, we offered you four pages of our paper, "The International Workers' Organizer," so that you could write your positions in case a debate had opened, which for us should be public before the vanguard and the masses.
That is to say, the FLTI proposed you to write in our newspaper, which reaches thousands and thousands of workers' activists around the world in all 5 continents, even when you don't like it and it causes you petty grudges.
Is that entryism? Is that a work to snatch two or three rank-and-file comrades? Just the opposite. This was a proposal for you to defend your positions if a discussion were to open up between our currents, so that you could convince our rank and file, our militants, our political periphery at an international level, and the vanguard workers we reach. We are convinced our program is correct. And if militants and currents sympathetic to the FLTI disagree with it and go away, then those are their convictions, and we will not suppress them with the whip of Stalinist centralism.
For example, in those pages of our newspaper you could have explained and disclaimed responsibility before sectors of the Bolivian workers' vanguard for the support that the LIT gave in 2018 to a sinister union bureaucracy of the miners of Huanuni in Bolivia, which militarized the mine by making a pact with the Morales government after the LIT had openly supported them.
You could have explained to the thousands of Marxists in Japan, who constitute a revolutionary bloc together with the FLTI, why you invited groups like Chukaku-ha, the gravediggers of the Japanese railway workers' struggle, to the CONCLAT (Caribbean and Latin American Meeting of Workers) congress in 2010.
You could have explained the role of your leader who was a “constituent convention delegate” in the sham of the Constituent Assembly in Chile in 2021, with which the masses were driven out of Plaza de la Dignidad and Piñera and the Pinochetista regime were saved.
Or, you could have discussed with our current publicly there.
But this is forbidden to any Stalinist apparatus. It seems to be a crime against humanity, when in truth, it is the best tradition in the Bolshevik Party regarding democratic centralism.

You are so blindly Stalinist that you didn't even notice this proposal. You overlooked it as if watching the wind blow by. The thing is that you are S-TA-LI-NIS-TS, from the same school as those who expelled you without hesitations or any debate at the LIT congress.

We insist, Bolshevism has a tradition on this, which was to hold public debates in their papers, even when differences arose among its leaders.
This regime of the Bolshevik Party, even inside, meant that the proletarian vanguard intervened in the debates of the organizations and leaderships that aimed to lead it to take power.
That revolutionary democracy was the one that guaranteed, through the conviction of the militants, the greatest of revolutionary disciplines in action, and not by the whip and persecution of the apparatuses.
This is precisely what we proposed to the MAS (Movement Towards Socialism) and the LIT back in 1988, before they expelled us as TBI (International Bolshevik Tendency) members: to provide us a page in the paper to publicly state our positions. That was like throwing holy water to a vampire. Everything exploded in a minute.

First conclusion: From the FLTI we have proposed, as we have done to all the currents with which we have maintained and still maintain relations, to all those we have approached or distanced ourselves, to organize public debates on the central issues that unite and separate us, where it is vital that the vanguard of the proletariat intervenes. This proposal, for you, is a sacrilege. It is of a "dishonest organization". It breaks the democratic centralism of the apparatus.
Let's be clear: for you, the apparatus is everything. Your rank and file, if they ever criticize you, and the vanguard of the proletariat, are nothing.

But what is even more serious is when you make the blatant Stalinist accusation, completely at odds with Trotskyism, claiming that "the comrades of the CIR in Argentina (your very small group in Argentina, Ed.), where you are well known (you tell us, Ed.) and repudiated by all the Trotskyist organizations that had already warned us about the type of organization that the FLTI is."
Are you saying that “all Trotskyist organizations in Argentina” repudiate us?… Which ones? The Socialist Workers' Party (PTS), which thinks you are incurable Morenoists and reformists? Seriously? Does Bregman's party speak ill of the FLTI because we denounced it for claiming that if it wins the elections, while maintaining the bourgeois state and its repressive forces intact, it will call for a “democratic” Constituent Assembly?

Which Argentine left-wing organizations condemn us? The Workers' Party (PO), which in 2002 brutally beat and handed over to the police our leader Juan "Pico" Muzzio during a demonstration in support of worker-recuperated factories like Brukman, a “deed” condemned by hundreds of political and labor movements internationally? The same Workers' Party (PO) that, during the tire workers' strike at Fate, physically assaulted the PTS to settle differences?
Tell us, which leftist movement "warned you about the kind of dishonest organization" the FLTI is? Was it the MST of Argentina, which "valiantly" fights alongside Sanders, Ocasio-Cortez, and other "Democratic Socialists" in the US who supported Biden, the murderer and genocidist of Palestine alongside Netanyahu, whose job Trump finished? Seriously?
Which group was it? Did the Nuevo MAS inform you of the “dishonesty” of the FLTI when it was them which in 1988 expelled the TBI (which later formed the PTS) with clubs, recording their conversations, for the sole “crime” of suggesting that 1989 was coming with the fall of the USSR, and that the international class struggle would be defined there? Meanwhile, the LIT remained tied to Stalinism in an unprincipled front in Argentina with the Communist Party as it handed over the USSR and other former workers' states to capitalist restoration. All of this, of course, endorsed by your leaders with “50 years of activism on the left.”

Your sources of information are at your level. Judging a movement based on what "public opinion" suggests is pure Stalinism, which created a global "public opinion," including within the USSR, that stated Trotsky and his followers were agents of the Mikado, of imperialism, traitors to the USSR, etc., and that Trotskyism, therefore, was an enemy of the revolution.

It would never occur to us to take a position on a current based on what “public opinion” says, because there is what Trotskyists call a crisis of leadership—that is, an overabundance of treacherous leaderships, which are the ones that impose “public opinion”. The task of revolutionaries is precisely to defeat this “public opinion” imposed by reformists.

We characterize and define the currents that claim to be Trotskyist and Marxist by their program before the masses and by their stance on the litmus tests of revolution, counter-revolution, and war, and not by the gossip whispered in your ears by reformists across the border.

The leadership of the MPR is advised by currents from Argentina that are in no way inferior to, and are a mirror image of, the PSTU, the PCdoB, the PSOL, and other left-wing groups in Brazil, always ready to submit to Lula's Popular Front and the bourgeoisie.
Nothing different from what the leadership of the MPR did when it was within the PSTU and the LIT, calling for votes for class collaboration fronts like Petro in Colombia, Boric in Chile, Castillo in Peru and countless capitulations to the popular front, a matter which in our opinion you have to clarify.

What the “public opinion” that advises you thinks, then, is of no concern to us. This only speaks volumes about you.

The FLTI was built not by stealing two or three members from each leftist sect, but on the basis of agreements, mergers, and revolutionary blocs at the international level, as the facts, the stubborn facts, demonstrate.
The FLTI is not a continuation of any current, whether Morenoist, Mandelist, Lambertist, etc. We fight and struggle to recover the legacy of the theory and program of the Fourth International, which proved to have stood the test of history, unlike the “Trotskyists” who haven't, no matter how many 50 years of militancy you have or how many epics you try to sell.

The FLTI is the political, programmatic, and organizational result of a process of mergers and even ruptures among healthy forces within the Trotskyist movement and revolutionary Marxism, based on a program that has withstood the litmus tests of the international class struggle. We insist, this has either united or divided us in our policy of building among different currents of Marxism.

The splits within our international current are clear. The debate over whether China is an imperialist country or not led to breaking away from the New Zealand group, which was part of the FLTI (International Leninist Trotskyist Fraction), and which began its own formation, calling for the establishment of the Fifth International. The question of whether there are specific tasks of national liberation in the semi-colonial world led to a major debate on the Libyan and Syrian issues with the Trotskyists in South Africa, with whom we maintain an excellent fraternal relationship.

Our current has rejected any policy of breaking away based on moral and methodological accusations, without a program or principles. We leave that to the currents that have broken away with Trotskyism, because such methodology demoralizes the workers' vanguard, while open political struggle strengthens it and builds self confidence in its strength. The role of Stalinism is to break the revolutionary will of the workers in order to then manipulate them into ignominy and demoralization.

Our current fights, as Trotskyism did in the 1930s, for building revolutionary blocs for international action, exploring the conditions for achieving a new Kienthal and Zimmerwald, which will serve as a foundation for the refounding of the Fourth International.

Thus, since 2006, we have established an international bloc for action with the revolutionary Marxist comrades of the JRCL-RMF of the Pacific, a vanguard party with thousands of members in Japan and China. Together, for example, we have participated in the Syrian revolution. They supported the fighters of the Leon Sedov Brigade, who reached the front lines, leaving 16 heroes and martyrs there, fighting against Putin, Assad, the Iranian Ayatollahs, and imperialism. With these comrades, we participated in revolutionary processes such as those in Chile, Palestine, and throughout the Middle East.

Our current is in open discussion with Iranian Trotskyism in the resistance. Anyone who visits our website will see their publications.
We also openly discuss with currents within the Ukrainian Social Movement, which oppose Putin and, on the home front, Zelensky. And they discuss with us from our press. We are not a sect. Everything is about unity, and differences in the respective programs. This is how Kienthal and Zimmerwald emerged, the embryo of the Third and Fourth Internationals, where reform versus revolution clashed, and centrist currents had to choose. Anything else is a Stalinist fallacy, and it is your own responsibility.

However, there is one issue we will not allow and we cannot just walk on by. We are determined to clarify it as much as necessary.

In your letter, you accuse us of having a “nefarious history in Argentina,” which is an act of unprecedented audacity and arrogance… If there is a nefarious history in Argentina, it is that of the MPR leadership. Let your leaders of “50 years of activism” come forward and let us publicly debate our respective histories in the international class struggle and in Argentina in particular. Stop telling epic tales that only delivered defeats.

What is our “nefarious history”? Was it breaking with the MAS in '88 when it was allied with Stalinism in Argentina just in a moment the Stalinist bureaucracy was handing over the USSR, China, and other former workers' states to imperialism? You were part of that party and that leadership that was allied with the Communist Party. You still have your “dirty laundry” to wash and you haven't explained it.

What “nefarious history”? Founding the PTS and fighting from within it for the Trotskyist program when the MAS was falling apart in the 90s? Ten years later, was it a milestone of our “nefarious history”, breaking away with the national-Trotskyism of the PTS, which remained vying for MAS votes and refused to regroup Trotskyist forces internationally and engage in political struggle against its liquidators?
What “nefarious history” are you talking about? Perhaps the history of fighting in Mosconi, the most advanced piquetero movement (unemployed workers, NT), and fighting alongside Aníbal Verón, who was assassinated?
What “nefarious history”? Founding ourselves in 2000-2001 in the midst of the Argentine revolution? What “nefarious history”? The history of the time when, as an international current, we stood alone and garnered hundreds of endorsements for the 11 workers sentenced to life imprisonment in Las Heras, in southern Argentina? The one about having been at the forefront of the fight for all prisoners and those prosecuted in Argentina, whether under Peronista governments, or the Macri or Milei ones?

Are you talking about our struggle alongside the families of those murdered in the Senkata massacre in Bolivia and the Juliaca massacre in Peru, whom we have never abandoned, just as we have never abandoned the miners of Marikana in South Africa who are still crying out for justice for the 34 comrades murdered 14 years ago?

“A disastrous history in Argentina”? Are you talking about our struggle on the left wing of the Río Santiago Shipyard, where 3,000 workers are employed? About our struggle in the two largest steel mills in Argentina, where our shop stewards were persecuted and fired by the management of Rocca? About our fight as part of one of the most militant internal commissions in the country, like the one at the Paty company, which resisted for years and years until its closure?

What are you talking about? Are you referring to the militant internationalism of our current, which united the tire workers fired from Pirelli in an internationalist action alongside Pirelli workers in Italy—the opposite of what the PO did when it led the tire workers' union in Argentina? Or are you talking about our comrades, the meatpacking and UOM delegates who went to the Conlutas congress to fight for the collection of a daily wage from each worker to supply the Syrian and Palestinian resistance with weapons and food?
Are you talking about our tireless struggle against the reformism and parliamentary cretinism of the FIT-U, which proved to be an infamous electoral cooperative that is now falling apart? You supported and continue to support the FIT-U, which voted for more than 123 laws by Peronism in the Congress, forming a true political front with the bourgeoisie in the Parliament of the  executioners of the people.
What "nefarious history" are you referring to? What has your tiny nucleus in Argentina told you? Why aren't you fixing the communications? Or are these just prejudices and slander from old, resentful leaders because Trotskyism hasn't died, despite their countless attempts to destroy it? We are proud of that. Let it be known. We are the only current that intervened in the civil war in recent years, while everyone else watched us cowardly from afar. We are proud to be fighting in Syria and throughout the Middle East.

Come on, stand up. Honor the 16 Trotskyists who fell in the Syrian revolution. Otherwise, we already know where you'll end up, with Assad's lackeys.

As the Transitional Program states: “Even today, the Fourth International has deservedly earned the hatred of the Stalinists, the social democrats, the liberal bourgeoisie, and the fascists. There is no place for it, nor can there ever be, in any Popular Front. The Fourth International irreconcilably combats all political groups clinging to the coattails of the bourgeoisie. Its task: the abolition of capitalist domination. Its objective: socialism. Its method: proletarian revolution.”

We want to make it clear that if you want to take stock of our historical trajectories, we can do so whenever you wish, publicly, in front of the masses.

The political relationship with the MPR has broken down, and the political reason is that you continue to march to the same conclusions. As has been demonstrated, you hold a Stalinist conception of construction within the workers' movement and international Marxism, which is nothing more than a reflection of your current policies and alliances with groups adhering to Kurdish Stalinism, a partner of Zionism. Given this fact, it remains to be seen whether the leadership of the MPR will make a complete about-face and join Parras's international faction, which split from the official LIT-CI group in the Spanish State. Parras, a former prominent leader of the LIT-CI, is currently on a Liaison Committee with the PTS of Argentina and has proclaimed his repudiation of all LIT-CI policies, claiming to be in the military trenches with Assad and Gaddafi "against imperialism." All that's left for this man to do is suggest that the Spanish Communist Party, from which he originates, also join the Liaison Committee with the PTS.

Any debate with the leadership of the MPR will be public and open to the masses.

We will send this letter to all the currents fighting to establish a revolutionary and internationalist pole of the international proletariat.

The honest revolutionaries of Brazil and the advanced workers, whether from the MPR, the PSTU, those being led into the dead end of class collaboration through support for the Popular Front, those trying to mobilize their class by linking their fate to that of the Latin American and international proletariat in its struggle against imperialism, have and will have much to say in the coming period.

There is a new generation of workers who were immobilized by the siren songs of class collaboration fronts and reformism, while imperialism now wields the scourge of fascism, as the heroic masses of Palestine and Lebanon are suffering, while the US imperialism returns to the world to recover their spheres of influence through counter-revolutionary wars, as we have seen in their fierce attack on Iran. This compels advanced workers and all currents claiming revolutionary Marxism to establish a trench of struggle in Latin America to mobilize the working class alongside the repressed workers and peasants in Bolivia, alongside the masses in revolt in Peru, and fighting alongside Latin American migrants in the US to confront the brutal colonizing offensive of the US imperialism, who have already intervened militarily in Venezuela and are besieging Cuba, while the new Castroist bourgeoisie has dedicated itself to surrendering the Latin American revolution.

The fate of the working class of our continent is tied to the fate of the Palestinian masses and the entire Middle East, attacked by imperialism and Zionism… In the international struggle and in the fight against reformist, Stalinist, and Trotskyist renegade leaderships lies the solution to resolving the leadership crisis, which grows more acute every day.

That is our challenge, and to meet it we must raise a clear and untainted program and banner before the international working class, despite the attempts by Stalinism and its followers to tarnish them.

“The Truth of the Oppressed” of the socialists of Syria and the Middle East
International Workers League of Zimbabwe
Avanzata Proletaria - Proletarian Advance of Italy
Liga Socialista de los Trabajadores Internacionalistas - Internationalist Socialist Workers League of Bolivia
Partido Obrero Internacionalista - Internationalist Workers Party (POI-CI) of Chile
Liga Socialista de los Trabajadores Internacionalistas -Internationalist Socialist Workers League of Peru
Núcleo Obrero Internacionalista - Internationalist Workers Nucleus of Colombia
Liga Obrera Internacionalista (LOI-CI) / Democracia Obrera –
Internationalist Workers League / Workers' Democracy of Argentina
Luta Pela Base - Fight for the Base of Brazil
Members of the FLTI