This is a method of creating unity around only one issue, so that disagreements on other issues do not make action and organization impossible. This is an easier way to start organizing politically. When people are in multiple such organizations and (start to?) more extensively agree with one another on multiple issues, they could then form more serious political parties (multi-issue groups). This then morphes into the o-3 method (perhaps).
It should be a fairly natural flow of events to debate something (o-0), to find an issue of agreement to form a single issue coalition (o-0B). To then work on that effort, which leads to finding more agreements with more people, and gives time and opportunity to debate more issues perhaps leading to more agreements. The buying fair trade (o-1) and building cooperative businesses and funds for them (o-2) can provide something to do outside of politics/ideology, which can lead to more unity and mutual confidence, while testing and experiencing more of the practice of these things.
For example someone hears about this whole DAVID system, they may reject it for some reason, but perhaps there is one issue of agreement. An often heard disagreement is the system of land distribution proposed here (although no real reasons are typically given, it is more of a rejection of the unknown). One issue agreement can then be used to create a single issue coalition (o-0B), or perhaps multiple one issue coalitions can be formed. Perhaps that is all that will happen, however what is wrong with trying to start a business ? Those who are more adventurous may like the idea, especially if there is little risk. Then they suddenly discover how amazing it would be, if they already had soil for free. Then they suddenly start to see reality.... and one thing might lead to the next .....