I'm confused. Where did you get the idea "elites" need to handle everything? Parent simply stated unorganized groups with a non-unified message allows a single member to ruin the entire movement.

So where do "elites" come into play?

Edit: oh I see your account was created 15 minutes ago to just post bullshit. Sigh.

I think he got the idea that the "elites" need to handle everything, through having a sense of sarcasm.

It's deleted now but at the time when I read it it didn't appear sarcastic at all. I thought I was usually good at figuring out sarcasm on the internet so I'm going to blame their terrible ability to express it (if that was the case). :)

Possibly trollish sarcasm aside, I didn't say anything about elites, only about organization. It's more important that there's a hierarchy who can say "no, we don't support this person" with the rest of the group's implicit backing when something inevitably goes wrong.

This means that your group is at the mercy of a figurehead, but that figurehead may or may not ruin the group. Leaving it up to the whims of your membership tends that probability towards 1.