We are called a community when a group of like-minded individuals join together towards a common goal. It doesn't mean that we should all follow one abstract way of thinking, and this chain of thought leads to fragmentation of a community due to the fact that we simply do not think like the others.
Take for example, the Bitcoin ABC side of the Bitcoin Cash community. They seem to have taken up a "we created BCH, stop fighting us" mindset which is showcased in a humorous light through @micropresident's memes in r/Commucurrency where they depict ABC (themselves) as some sort of "unmovable cheating dictatorship", hence *commu*currency. They believe of proper funding but their way of doing it requires the whole BCH blockchain to bow down to ABC. We do need funding, yes, but by hijacking a chain to force an IFP with the blocks or else be (implicitly stated) orphaning other blocks is a very bad means to an end.
All other controversies aside, people aren't used to think for themselves under leaders, and this way of thinking rose to create thoughts which will conform to their community needs because of their acceptance of their leader's ideas being helpful to the community. This does help keep the community together, but it risks shunning others who have radically different opinions on the world around them. This is historically true with Galileo when he proposed the heliocentric model and the geocentric-believing Catholic Church forced him to abandon his claims.
On the darker side of history, Hitler managed to get the whole of Germany under his banner because Germans during his time found his ideas to be good and helpful to their country, despite on how bad it really was.
The thing is, that a good community can rise with different thought processes. We simply just don't have a leader that is able to do so properly. After all, these leaders are simply a respected person like us. We look up to them like idols, and if these leaders know how to properly handle other idealogies other leaders have, we will have a better influence and good over all. A council of leaders work better together than a lone leader.
With different behaviors from every leader, more grounds can be covered upon as not all ideas are the same. That said, this will be the leaders' worst weakness as they will soon disagree with their former leaders' actions and their current co-leaders.
Not one of my best articles, I admit. Don't really know if I should rewrite this, but this is my observation for the ABC vs BCH fiasco lately.
Rowan signing off.
I have no idea what your other articles are like but neither what exactly you try to say here/make clear. For what are you preaching? I do not see a leader as an idol and a lonely leader is not a leader but an individual. Only sheep need someone to lead them.
As a moderator: this is not a freewrite and by now you should know why not.