We have different life experiences which sensitize us to some sides of social life more than others. We suffer some pains more than others, discern some oppressions more precisely and aggressively than others, pursue some agendas more militantly than others. We develop movements of national and racial communities, women, gays and lesbians, workers, and young people around such focuses as race, religious bigotry, gender, sexuality, poverty and class, authority, war and peace, and species and the ecology. The bad side of this multi-facetedness is that none of these agendas can be accomplished by only those who see it as their first priority. A single vast apparatus with many mutually enforcing dimensions enforces these oppressions.
Separate efforts dilute strength and compete for allegiance, priority, resources, and status.
The good side of this multi-facetedness is that each separate effort better utilizes the insights of those most attuned to the complexities of its focus than would any single orientation subsuming all the rest. Trying to use one single orientation inevitably subsumes much of what is dynamic and influential in each area, picking out only a few central features to address. This not only excludes a lot, it often prescribes aims for parts of society contrary to the needs of those most oppressed, rather than determined by them. So we criticize fragmenting into single-focused efforts because they weaken the total movement and even each component by fragmenting energies, inducing competitions, etc. But we also appreciate these laser-focused efforts because they elevate the true needs of those who feel each type oppression most directly.