i completely agree about unity. mostly, i see false - or forced - unity.
the idea that individuals could participate in decisions and actions around specific issues of interest to them points toward direct democracy, which i don't think is feasible in mass society, if it was even desirable. it also flies in the face of party politics, which is how representative democracy seems to work. party politics are based on "platforms", which bundle up a whole bunch of issues ("planks"), and the party stands on that entire platform.
the idea that individuals could choose what (issues) concern them, and act on that - with others if desired or needed - in whatever ways they decide to, is kind of a pillar of anarchist thought. and that flies in the face of any kind of politics i can think of.
perhaps i need clarification on what you mean by "political stances". does that refer to adhering to party lines (their platform)? or do you mean how one feels about and responds to a specific issue of interest to them?
in the current environment, i am not sure what "politics" means to people anymore.