> Two parties talking "past" each other is one of the most common sources of disagreement in my experience. A prime and recent example of this is "defund the p

> Two parties talking "past" each other is one of the most common sources of disagreement in my experience. A prime and recent example of this is "defund the police". You could talk to 10 people at a protest and get 10 different answers on what that means, and that's among supporters. Any actual conversation on the topic has to start with "well what do you mean?". You would often hear a refrain of "nobody is talking about completely defunding the police." but there was plenty of actual support for that in just-outside-of-mainstream groups. So many movements are united behind such vague slogans that they garner widespread support because everybody has a personal and reasonable (to them) interpretation of it's meaning. "Cancel culture" just the next "Occupy Wallstreet", "Black Lives Matter", "Defund the Police", etc. It's a leaderless grassroots phenomenon with no stated objectives or goals. I think people are much more concerned with finding a community to fight with rather than actually winning the fight.