Back in the days when Occupy movement was starting, and 4chan people were trolling Scientologists, this was lauded as a new era of social movements - decentralized. No central organization to squash, anyone can pick up the label and carry the fight.

What we got was also predictable, though. If anyone can fight under any banner, if nobody owns the banner, there is no possibility to come to a compromise, to settle the differences. The proponents of a movement will pick the most benign shard as an example to defend and popularize their cause; the opponents of the movement will pick the most extremist shard as a justification to fight back. Everyone feels their survival is at stake.

That's like asking who speaks for feminism, Occupy, or the gilets jaunes. They're decentralized.

That's a fine point, but I was just told someone DIDN'T speak for them.

They don't. No single person or organization can speak for a decentralized movement.

Does this mean that the movement does not mean anything specific?