The concept of a "Party" is a purposeful contrivance. There is nothing organic about a permanent coalition in honest debate.

If you take 100 people, put them into a room, ask them to debate a topic, and come up with a solution, you will get 100 different ideas and opinions. You will get agreements on some talking points, i.e. groups of agreement, and disagreements on others. You won't get "two sides" to each talking point, you will get five, or ten, or twenty. Overall, no one will "agree completely" and no one will "vote" on something they disagree with. However, over time, a solution will bear out. This is how engineering teams solve problems. Why do we do it different in politics?

We do it differently in political debate, because if you make everyone put on a red shirt or a blue shirt before walking into the debate room, you get two voices. All the red shirts will "agree" simply because they are on the same team, and vise versa. If you add yellow shirts to the mix, it's still the same problem, only now there are three voices instead of 100. If there are shirt colors (parties) then the system has already failed.

There is absolutely no reason to have a priori teams in problem solving. It will never be beneficial. I assert that all such "team making" in politics throughout all of history was a purposeful contrivance of the Cabal.

When you add "Party Leaders" into the mix, it makes it trivial to control the conversation. You only need to corrupt two people instead of 100. With those two people you can create two sides of a conversation. This creates division throughout the whole population, not just the debating group. And as we know, division is the necessary precursor to "conquer."

The real fuckery with "parties" is; you can create the same solution (AKA the Cabal's solution) with the two sides of the conversation that you control. This happens all the time.

The Federal Reserve Act was exactly that. The FRA is the greatest single piece of fuckery in our current system of government. The FRA was the "Democrat" plan up against the "Republican" plan called the Aldrich Plan. The kicker is, they were the exact same plan. The FRA had a contrived system of "Decentralization" (because everyone needs a little decentralization in their Central Bank), but other than this contrivance, which was a complete illusion, it was identical across the board.

TL;DR: There is no such thing as Parties in honest debate and problem solving, no matter how many you have. They are nothing but a means to perpetuate the fraud.