Lowest common denominator "anti-capitalism" as a uniting organizing principle may be one of the more frustrating and dumb things I've personally witnessed.

It really boggles my mind that there's people who fall for this bizarre "Left Unity" idea. Some person or group calling themselves "anti-capitalist" or "leftist" 1) doesn't mean they actually are and 2) doesn't mean you have to work with them.

Like, it often makes a lot of sense to not be picky about political tendencies if you're working on an immediate tangible thing. Eviction defense? So long as they aren't trying to co-opt/hijack or otherwise causing problems, the more the merrier.

But when it's a general political org? Makes no sense. What "good work" you manage to do is hobbled by weird lefty problems like fetishizing groups over people, or having a low enough bar for who you work with that suddenly you're doing shit with toxic groups everyone else knows to avoid.

Lots of people seem to confuse action and "doing the work" with internal bookkeeping for an organization. Suddenly you're so wrapped up with maintaining scheduling and calenders and spreadsheets to just keep the org going that you find out you're not really doing that much that *isn't* just keeping the org going. People don't often step back and ask "is this actually necessary, or is this cumbersome overhead?"

The energy to actually *do something* is sucked into some organizational structure, unnecessary meetings, or deferred until later, which typically means it fizzles out.

@kworker
I think this tends to happen when the organization wants to develop an activity that is oversized in relation to its capabilities. To this end, it also creates oversized structures.
@xto_lg I can see that. But I think there's sometimes a confusion that building up an organization *is* the point, when IMO an organization is means to an end. All too easy to wind up with an org that doesn't really do too much, but constantly has people churning through.