DIVIDE AND CONQUER

It's important to be aware of the means by which those in power subvert radical groups using indirect means -- this is particularly common with activist groups, where over police and military action can't be brought to bear against the activists without drawing considerable bad press. The following "divide and conquer" strategy shows how PR flaks classify activist personalities, and how they manipulate them. In this case, they're focusing on environmental groups, but it can be applied to any social issues groups. Determine where you are in Duchin's classification, so you can at least be aware of attempts to manipulate you and get you to abandon your views for those supporting the status quo.

(excerpted from Toxic Sludge is Good for You! by John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton, Common Courage Press)

Dealing With Idealists

Since at least the days of Aristotle, practitioners of the art of rhetoric have understood that an endorsement from their opponent carries more persuasive power than anything they can say themselves. The public relations industry therefore carefully cultivates activists who can be coopted into working against the goals of their movement. This strategy has been outlined in detail by Ronald Duchin, senior vice-president of PR spy firm Mongoven, Biscoe and Duchin. A graduate of the US Army War College, Duchin worked as a special assistant to the Secretary of Defense and director of public affairs for the Veterans of Foreign Wars before joining Pagan International and MBD. In a 1991 speech to the National Cattlemen's Association, he described how MBD works to divide and conquer activist movements. Activists, he explained, fall into four distinct categories: "radicals," "opportunists," "idealists," and "realists." He outlined a three-step strategy: (1) isolate the radicals; (2) "cultivate" the idealists and "educate" them into becoming realists; then (3) coopt the realists into agreeing with industry.

According to Duchin, radical activists "want to change the system; have underlying socio/political motives" and see multinational corporations as "inherently evil....These organizations do not trust the...federal, state and local governments to protect them and to safeguard the environment. They believe, rather, that individuals and local groups should have direct power over industry.... I would categorize their principal aims right now as social justice and political empowerment."

Idealists are also "hard to deal with." They "want a perfect world and find it easy to brand any product or practice which can be shown to mar that perfection as evil. Because of their intrinsic altruism, however, and because they ahve nothing perceptible to be gained by holding their position, they are easily believed by both the media and the public, and sometimes even politicians." However, idealists "have a vulnerable point. If they can be shown that their position in opposition to an industry or its products causes harm to others and cannot be ethically justified, they are forced to change their position.... Thus, while a realist must be negotiated with, an idealist must be educated. Generally this education process requires great sensitivity and understanding on the part of the educator."

By contrast, opportunists and realists are easier to manipulate. Duchin defines opportunists as people who engage in activism seeking "visibility, power, followers, and, perhaps, even employment.... The key to dealing with opportunists is to provide them with at least the perception of a partial victory." And realists are able to "live with trade-offs; willing to work within the system; not interested in radical change; pragmatic. The realists should always receive the highest priority in any strategy dealing with a public policy issue... If your industry can successfully bring about these relationships, the credibility of the radicals will be lost and opportunists can be counted on to share in the final policy solution."