19

I have come across the following political phenomenon recently and I can’t find the right word for it.

Imagine a group of people (say an ethnic minority or gender) who campaign against their mistreatment by the government. Now imagine the government secretly sets up another group populated by people of the same minority (or gender) who supposedly are campaigning for the same cause. But in fact their job is to undermine the arguments against the government and so to discredit the original group of complainants.

What do you call such a group?

J.R.
  • 109,547
  • 9
  • 164
  • 291
Simd
  • 299
  • 2
  • 5
  • 1
    How about "trolls"? – Masked Man Apr 01 '18 at 15:45
  • I’ve been looking for this expression myself I don’t think what has been said quite covers it. It can be very subtle like creating a conspiracy theory that’s a bit ridiculous in order to discredit conspiracy theorists, this happens all the time. I believe this strategy was invented or developed by multinational companies to undermine their opponents. I’ve use the expression it in the past but I just can’t remember what it is. – Eric Blackburn Jul 21 '20 at 08:12

9 Answers9

25

This is a False Flag operation, almost exactly by definition.

Jeff Zeitlin
  • 4,791
  • 1
  • 19
  • 27
  • The group might be called a counter gang. – Clearer Mar 31 '18 at 19:09
  • 2
    I'd say "false flag" applies exclusively to military or quasi-military action perpetrated supposedly by another country (hence the "flag"). Political movements do not have flags—well, they might have one, but that is not their usual attribute that defines them the way a flag defines a country, it is a mere variation of branding (unusual to boot). –  Apr 01 '18 at 21:27
  • @tenebris2020 The expression false flag has been genericized to mean any sort of sockpuppet pretending to be an opponent. – chrylis -cautiouslyoptimistic- Apr 02 '18 at 05:26
  • 3
    @chrylis - It's more like 'flag' (or 'banner') has been metaphorised to stand for the representative philosophy of a group, and 'false flag' has been carried along. – Jeff Zeitlin Apr 02 '18 at 09:12
  • 1
    @chrylis I haven't seen this term applied to something restricted to internal political struggles. If it's been applied this way, it is a metaphor that might not be applicable to a specific situation, because depending on the country you are talking about, the political situation might be such that the term might be misunderstood to mean exactly an intervention by another country. This is a ground that has to be treaded carefully. –  Apr 02 '18 at 10:46
  • @JeffZeitlin I must have missed "another group" in OP's question. I will remove my earlier comment. – Gossar Apr 02 '18 at 23:51
11

Being Spanish, the expression Fifth column comes immediately to mind. It looks like it has been used in English, but I do not know how usual it is.

Miguel
  • 219
  • 1
  • 7
  • 2
    And, on second thoughts, Trojan horse. – Miguel Mar 31 '18 at 15:00
  • 1
    "Fifth column" is common in English, but doesn't mean this. It refers to the first group in the question, not the second. – Luke Sawczak Mar 31 '18 at 16:06
  • Here's a link to an example of it being called a Fifth Column in a Canadian newspaper when talking about the Ukraine: https://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/vladimir-putins-fifth-column-in-the-west/article19021604/ – m_a_s Mar 31 '18 at 19:55
  • @LukeSawczak, but since OP's first group are outsiders and not a part of the government, fifth column would not apply to them. It does apply to the second group unless you restrict the meaning to double agents within a government. – Gossar Apr 01 '18 at 04:28
  • The main idea of the term is being a traitor to one's own party in the pay of another. The government being behind the second group somewhat defeats the purpose. That said, I guess I could see how on a small scale the first group might regard the second as a fifth column within it. I was still thinking in terms of the country. – Luke Sawczak Apr 01 '18 at 04:35
  • 1
    @LukeSawczak from the Wikipedia article: "A fifth column is any group of people who undermine a larger group from within, usually in favour of an enemy group or nation." That's exactly what OP is describing. – RonJohn Apr 01 '18 at 16:50
  • 3
    @RonJohn Wikipedia is unfortunately being too broad here. It's not about any "larger group", it's specifically about a country, where a "fifth column" is accused of working in the interests of another, hostile, country. https://www.britannica.com/topic/fifth-column –  Apr 01 '18 at 21:34
  • 2
    @LukeSawczak Indeed, it's about a country. Using it to apply to a group within a movement would be possible only as a metaphor. –  Apr 01 '18 at 21:38
  • @tenebris2020 The origin of the Spanish term is in the civil war, so it is not restricted to a conflict between countries, at least in origin. – Miguel Apr 01 '18 at 22:43
  • @RonJohn "That's exactly what OP is describing." No, it's not. A fifth column performs acts that, in themselves, weaken the target. The OP is describing a group whose actions influence other people's actions. – Acccumulation Apr 02 '18 at 01:01
  • @Miguel In the civil war, one side is accusing the other of acting in the interest of a foreign country. No real conflict between countries is necessary. It's enough that one side alleges that there is an external enemy (could be an imaginary one), and the other side supposedly works in the interests of that enemy. I'm from the former Soviet Union, and this term from your history has veritably thrived here. It's constantly present in both the assessments of how Russia treats those it thinks are working for the "enemy" West, and also in intra-Ukrainian accusations of who's working for Russia. –  Apr 02 '18 at 10:35
  • @RonJohn OP describes "another group", not "from within" – Izkata Apr 02 '18 at 13:54
  • @izkata "supposedly are campaigning for the same cause", so they (deceitfully) act "from within" the same ideological stance, if not the same physical group. – Miguel Apr 02 '18 at 20:10
10

Slightly broader than you asked: (in US) when a powerful group (government, political, commercial, or religious) recruits or employs people to simulate popular support for the powerful group or its position(s) or proposal(s), usually but not inherently by opposing, criticizing, or interfering with the (other) people who criticize or oppose the powerful group, it is called Astroturf or Astroturfing (not always capitalized, sometimes hyphenated).

This is a metaphor: actual Astroturf is a brand of artificial grass widely used for sports facilities, and groups or movements truly made up of ordinary people are called 'grassroots' (sometimes hyphenated), so Astroturf-ers are artificial or fake versions of such groups and people.

dave_thompson_085
  • 347
  • 1
  • 6
8

A name for the individuals in such a group, which could be pluralized for the group, agents provocateurs.

TimR
  • 123,877
  • 7
  • 100
  • 202
  • 3
    An agent provocateur would try to incite the real protesters to criminal action. The question is about a group who acts as though they are the real protesters in order to discredit them. – Planky Apr 01 '18 at 12:22
  • A fair point. I did not take OP's question to imply that this second group was populated exclusively by pretenders seeking to discredit the cause. I was thinking of a "local chapter", if you will, which was set up and manipulated by agents provocateurs. – TimR Apr 01 '18 at 14:17
  • 1
    @Planky inciting some protestors to violence would certainly discredit the movement. – RonJohn Apr 01 '18 at 16:48
7

Maybe, we should call them saboteurs since their job is to sabotage the first group's cause? Here's the meaning of the verb to sabotage as defined by the Collins English Dictionary:

If someone sabotages a plan or a meeting, they deliberately prevent it from being successful.

Michael Rybkin
  • 37,600
  • 29
  • 167
  • 310
5

I would call a person who works for the government and goes undercover in the group to undermine the group's authority or message an infiltrator, according to Cambridge Dictionary:

​a person who secretly becomes part of a group in order to get information or to influence the way the group thinks or behaves

The group itself could be referred to using the plural: infiltrators.

Attribution: "Infiltrator Meaning in the Cambridge English Dictionary." Cambridge Dictionary. Accessed March 31, 2018. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/infiltrator.

JJJ
  • 309
  • 5
  • 15
  • 1
    This seems like the most correct answer as it is unspecific to the actions of the individuals yet captures the point of a person disguising themselves as a group member. – Milo Apr 02 '18 at 02:21
  • 2
    An "infiltrator" needs to join a real group, aiming to undermine it from within. What we are talking here is setting up a separate group that might not even be communicating with a real one, to project a false image to the general public. –  Apr 02 '18 at 10:48
  • @tenebris2020 you might say they are infiltrating the movement advocating the idea the first group stands for. That doesn't necessarily require them to actively be in contact with the first group. – JJJ Apr 02 '18 at 10:53
  • @JJJ That's not how "infiltrating" usually works. An infiltrator joins a group usually to keep tabs on them. His/her function might not even be to provoke them to something. Govts sometimes send agents to infiltrate groups the govt considers subversive to know what they are up to at any given time. That's the meaning of infiltrating. –  Apr 02 '18 at 11:40
  • @tenebris2020 example where the infiltrators are outsiders coming to undermine without actually working with the original group: In standoffs in cities like Slovyansk, they have avoided head-on clashes with the rebels and have often seemed to be outmaneuvered by separatists in a shadowy campaign that Kiev says is being organized at least in part by Russian infiltrators. – JJJ Apr 02 '18 at 11:49
  • @JJJ I find this sentence sloppily formulated. It is unclear which group the infiltrators have joined—the separatists' units or Ukrainian army units (which is hardly possible). It is sorta a recognized fact that separatist groups are often trained (if not led) by Russian handlers. Nothing here resembles a situation of two groups that belong ostensibly to the same camp. There is no "rival pseudo-Ukrainian" "army unit" (which would properly be called a false flag operation) and no separatist group that mimics another separatist group. No resemblance to the OP's situation at all. –  Apr 02 '18 at 13:01
  • @JJJ It sometimes happens that even recognized publications fall prey to unfortunate word choice. This article is from May 2014, when the idea that the separatist movement in the east is in fact instigated by Russians was often under dispute in intl media (or at least not universally recognized). "Infiltrators" here probably means infiltrating the country (Ukraine) and then, from the inside (!), creating a semblance of a popular movement in favor of seceding. Again, this is about coming inside a certain entity. In this case, a country or its portion. –  Apr 02 '18 at 13:06
  • @tenebris2020 I read it as follows: Kiev (i.e. the Ukrainian government) accuses Russia of having Russian agents on the ground supporting separatists (in Ukraine). Of course Russia will deny this (Russia will not acknowledge having its agents operating in foreign countries), so you could say Russia is running a false flag (following the precise definition in the highest-rated answer to this question) operation in Ukraine. – JJJ Apr 02 '18 at 13:07
  • @JJJ Your interpretation is also possible. Besides, this article being from 2014, when a lot of military action on the part of Ukrainian govt was still carried on by volunteer battalions, it is theoretically possible that Russians infiltrated some of those volunteer battalions, and that is why they were being "outmaneuvered". It's really not clear what the article is saying, but in either possible case, it's about outside agents joining a group. Which group—not clear. But again, there is no attempt to set up groups that would mimic either Ukr. govt units, or separatist units. –  Apr 02 '18 at 13:11
  • @tenebris2020 at that time there was already speculation of Russian paramilitary involvement in Eastern Ukraine. See this article by the Guardian dated a month before the WP article – JJJ Apr 02 '18 at 13:16
  • @JJJ This is a realization that was coming in differently timed waves to different publications and individual authors. Some were not convinced for a loooong time :) having been persuaded/duped by claims on the part of Russia "nope, it's not us". –  Apr 02 '18 at 13:17
2

Just yesterday, lazily following the political developments in my country (Ukraine) where a lot of political "innovations", both home-grown and imported, are constantly being tested, I saw a similar phenomenon being called

fake activists.

Yes, that plain and simple.

All the suggestions made so far apply to situations that differ in important aspects from what you want to say.

A "false flag operation" is when a group of soldiers (or special forces operatives) of country A perpetrate a violent act making it look like they were in fact soldiers/operatives of country B. It has never (to my knowledge) been used for the situation that you are describing, which is a political trick restricted to civilian life. A classic example of a false flag operation is one that gave the Soviet Union a pretext to attack Finland in 1939, when "unknown operatives" shelled a Soviet border guard post, and this act was pinned on Finns (giving the Soviet Union the pretext to attack Finland), when in fact it was perpetrated by Soviet operatives.

"Th fifth Column" is a term amply present in our political discourse when discussing who is a "useful idiot" who, by his/her/their actions, benefits Russian interests, but again this is not used in discussions that do not involve an external enemy. The "fifth column" may not even exist—it might be an imaginary group of people that is accused of working for a different, purportedly hostile, country. E. g., this article from The New Yorker describes how President Putin of Russia sees people who are dissatisfied with his rule as people who try to sow discord and are thus working for the purportedly hostile West.

"Infiltrators" join a certain group—they don't set up a rival group that mimics someone.

Etc. etc.

People who pretend to be activists (of whatever movement) are just that — fake activists.

1

I'd probably call them entryists.

user29742
  • 111
  • 1
  • That doesn't really seem to apply to a situation where the dishonest actors set up a separate group. – stangdon Apr 02 '18 at 20:48
1

Another term, which is used particularly when the government in your question is the Russian or former Soviet government, is active measures. According to Wikipedia (the quote in the Wikipedia excerpt is from The Mitrokhin Archive):

Active measures range "from media manipulations to special actions involving various degrees of violence". They were used both abroad and domestically. They included disinformation, propaganda, counterfeiting official documents, assassinations, and political repression, such as penetration into churches, and persecution of political dissidents.

Example from Wikipedia:

Operation INFEKTION was a KGB disinformation campaign to spread information that the United States invented HIV/AIDS as part of a biological weapons research project at Fort Detrick, Maryland. (link to corresponding Wikipedia page)

In your case you could say those part of the government group to undermine the other group are members of active measures against that group.

Attribution:

1 "Active Measures." Wikipedia. April 04, 2018. Accessed April 04, 2018. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_measures.

2 "Operation INFEKTION." Wikipedia. April 04, 2018. Accessed April 04, 2018. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_INFEKTION.

JJJ
  • 309
  • 5
  • 15