I tend to agree with all the points here, except for the troubling word “unity”! 
While (I think) I understand what Asbjorn means, that an absence of backstabbing and a little more mutual support amongst people like us, who many rather powerful lobbies would like to see silenced or dead, would be helpful, this concept of making “unity” paramount is beloved of would-be prophets and cult-leaders!
Aka, those who want to lead a mass of sheep, eagerly policing each other for thoughtcrimes, stamping out individuality and free-thinking, and who violently silence anything that challenges their precious groupthink.
I’m certain that’s not what Asbjorn’s about, but the concept leads so readily towards it that I had to have my say.
For that reason, personally I’d go with tolerance, which means tolerating (not approving of, but neither, attempting to eradicate, invalidate, or shout down) the views and practices of fellow occultists which one happens personally not to share, as a healthy model for the wider community, as it has been on here.
Magick – if it’s not to become mere religion, or cultlike – is about experimentation, about peer-review, and about no concept being off-limits for rational exploration, and as such, feathers will be ruffled from time to time, corns stepped upon, and sacred cows tipped over – this is healthy, natural, and the foundation stone of freedom.
From Odin’s solitary quests to Set, wandering in the desert; from The Fool to The Hermit of Tarot, through the history of glorious lunatics that we read and speak of today, conscious conformity and limiting oneself to the then-contemporary morals has never been the hallmark of the magician.
And these are not traits compatible with unity in any group: they are the chaos element, the disruptor, the outsider. Which is what the world needs on a regular basis!
Individuality and freedom (and personal power) never sit well with calls to value unity above all else, because if unity becomes the only thing that matters, then the nail that sticks out MUST be hammered down, lest that unity be disturbed. 
Is that REALLY where we want to go, when “Hoe your own row, and let me hoe mine in equal freedom” could prevent such a thing?
All kinds of freedoms are under constant attack, online and off, and it’s almost always conducted under a mask of benevolence, for the greater good, for the children, and so on.
So, IMO, on this topic, we have to be very careful we never let the new boss (of our internal landscapes, at least) resemble the old boss we work so hard to overthrow!