Red Army Faction

[zapatista]

As the title would suggest, what are peoples views on the RAF?

[Trystan]

They were a bunch of morons who thought that by carrying shotguns and killing individuals they could achieve something for the proletariat. Of course, like their Italian counterparts in the Red Brigades, they didn't, and actually killed some workers in the process.

Small, tightly-knit terrorists groups like the RAF don't work and are unnecessary in societies where there is a generally decent amount of freedom of association and freedom of the press. Tsarist Russia is an obvious exception, and under those conditions tightly-knit groups (i.e. 'professional revolutionaries') was justified due to the lack of alternative methods of bringing about chamnge. But if the option of building a mass movement is available, socialists should always prefer it over terrorism.

[Djehuti]

As the title would suggest, what are peoples views on the RAF?

They did a few good things, such as...

The 1972 bombing of the american base in Heidelberg. They destroyed one of the computers that controled bomb planes in Vietnam. This was a true act of solidarity with the third world anti-imperialist struggle and surely saved the lifes of many vietnamese people.

And the murder of Hanns-Martin Schleyer, a very valid target.

But in larger perspective they were very unsuccessful, they isolated themselves and became nothing more than just marginalized terrorists. Their politcal and strategical analyis was very weak.

[Rangi]

The murder of Hanns-Martin Schleyer was chillingly well conducted and is worth reading about. Singled him out of a four car cavalcade using an ingenious bomb and trigger device.

[REVOLUTIONARY32]

The RAF are well respected here in the north of Ireland.Armed revolutionry cells like RAF Red Brigades Action direcete INLA are essential for the spread and succes of the revolution hand in hand with mass workers protests attacks on the establishment can bring it down "armed struggle is nescsesary at certain moments of the revolutionary process"Jean-mark Rouillan Action direcete

[Die Neue Zeit]

The RAF was an ultra-leftist group. The group could've been dismissed altogether by Marxists had it not been for the fact that the RAF committed its propaganda of the deed in the name of "Marxism-Leninism." Any self-proclaimed "Marxist group" that has propaganda of the deed at the core of its tactics should be at least denounced.

[Sasha]

blaablaablaa...
in short, intresting analysis (theory), shame about the praxis.
espacily the focus of the later raf-militants on their own prisoners put me of, to much knight in shining armor complex.
i'm more intrested in groups like the RZ (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Cells_%28RZ%29)/rota zora (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rote_Zora), direct action (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Squamish_Five) (canada) & RARA (http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionaire_Anti-Racistische_Actie).

[scarletghoul]

RAF were awesome.

[Charles Xavier]

Propaganda of the deed... they think that a group unconnected to the masses would inspire people to uprise by their individual acts of violence.

[Vanguard1917]

They were middle class leftists who were disillusioned with the working class and so decided to throw terror tantrums.

[bcbm]

They were a bunch of morons who thought that by carrying shotguns and killing individuals they could achieve something for the proletariat. Of course, like their Italian counterparts in the Red Brigades, they didn't, and actually killed some workers in the process.


The Red Brigades suffered from the same flawed thinking but they actually came out of class struggle and engineered their actions specifically to support proletarians, while the RAF were generally more concerned as being a first-world group supporting the struggles of Vietnam and Palestine.

[communard resolution]

And the murder of Hanns-Martin Schleyer, a very valid target.


It didn't win them the sympathy of the masses, but if you absolutely must murder an isolated individual to whatever avail, make it Hanns-Martin Schleyer, former SS officer and fanatic nazi/antisemite who after the end of WW2 decided that he was a good democrat after all and made an impressive career in the new Germany. As president of the German Employers Association, he made maximum use of his second chance to represent those who exploit and repress others.



But in larger perspective they were very unsuccessful, they isolated themselves and became nothing more than just marginalized terrorists. They were disillusioned with the passivity of the common people who were "blinded by consumerism" and decided to build socialism without the working class, but on their behalf. It's a ridiculous concept that can only result in North Korea type scenarios, if successful.

What's interesting about the RAF is the high percentage of women in their ranks and at the same time the extremely mysogynist/sexist/ignorant attitudes of many male members - a bit like a Motley Crue concert.

Good post, Djehuti.

[communard resolution]

The RAF was an ultra-leftist group.

They were predominately Maoists.

[communard resolution]

Armed revolutionry cells like RAF Red Brigades Action direcete INLA are essential for the spread and succes of the revolution hand in hand with mass workers protests

But comrade, the RAF was infamous for turning their backs on the working class. They did not work "hand in hand with mass workers protests" - in fact, they did not communicate with the workers at all, and this elitism was the whole problem.

Furthermore, their questionable strategy was to "tickle the fascism out of the system", i.e. they wanted to achieve a situation of maximum state repression in response to their assassinations, hoping the working class would then recognise the system for what it was and rise up.

[ex_next_worker]

An extensive, two-volume book on RAF is coming out very soon. Gotta be excellent reading.

https://secure.pmpress.org/index.php?l=product_detail&p=49

[Pogue]

They were useless and detached.

[Ravachol]

I think many people overlook the situation and conditions at the time.

First of all the West-German state had 90% of the old National-Socialist bureaucracy still installed and many leading executives of state and capital were in fact still active or passive supporters of fascism in one form or another as examplified by Reinhard Gehlen's position as head of the BND, Hanns Martin Schleyer's role as an Untersturmfuhrer and Hans Kruger's participation in the Beer hall putsch and the then National Security Advisor's role as one of the creators of the Enabling Act and Reichstag Fire Decree.

So de-facto, Western Germany was in fact controlled by a latent fascist apparatus. Combined with the heavy repression cumulating in the death of Benno Ohnesorg at a peacefull protest this resulted in the formation of the RAF.

The Brigate Rosse are a similar story, Italys executive governement had many ex-fascists in it, the intelligence and military apparati where filled with the same people that were put there under Mussolini and many active neo-fascist organisation like 'Ordine Nuevo' where supported by both the governement and the NATO in order to undermine revolutionary activity.

Secondly we have to consider Operation Gladio's involvement in the hijacking of the later waves of the Brigate Rosse, the RAF and the actual construction of the Cellules Combattantes Communistes (which used the same weapons as the supposedly right-wing Bende van Nijvel which were supplied by the Rijkswacht (Belgian National Guard).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Gladio (http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operatie_Gladio)

And for those who understand dutch:

http://reporter.kro.nl/uitzendingen/200 ... intro.aspx (http://reporter.kro.nl/uitzendingen/2007/0909_gladio_in_nederland/intro.aspx)
http://www.peterrdevries.nl/tekst/menin ... gladio.htm (http://www.peterrdevries.nl/tekst/mening-pers-en-gladio.htm)
http://www.bendevannijvel.com/info/bibliografie.html

Gladio simply stimulated highly untactical and unpopular tactics among the hijacked or self-created armed groups in order to discredit and destroy the revolutionary movement.

That being said, some of the early activity of the Brigate Rosse, Revolutionaire Zellen and the RAF were in my eyes legitimate moves.

However it wasn't very tactical, especially the whole communique and declaring war business gives the state and media the ability to focus upon an enemy and create a haunting 'feindbild' that damages the movement as a whole. Still, we must consider the fact that active violence, repression and at times murder is being used by the state and capital as well so simply saying 'violence is wrong in all cases' is just naive.

[kersplebedeb]

the members of the RAF were - and still are - much maligned and much defamed.

the west german state went to insane lengths to isolate them from the rest of the left and "the masses". despite this, time and again the group beat the odds, renewed its membership gutted by arrests and police killings, and retained a place for itself within the revolutionary left.

did the group make mistakes? of course. please tell me which groups have existed that have not made errors? but a lot of what gets said about them, and has been said about them in this forum, is just twaddle.

[communard resolution]

So de-facto, Western Germany was in fact controlled by a latent fascist apparatus.

I think you're pushing it here. Much of the personnel was the same as before 1945, true - but most of these people weren't fascists, they were just the same opportunists that exist in any system.

After the fall of the Berlin wall in 1989, the PDS ('Democratic Socialists') were denounced for largely consisting of ex-SED members. Which was certainly true, but the same could be said about the Christian Democratic party in post-wall East Germany. There will always be careerists who adapt to any given situation, and I think this was very much the case in West Germany after 1945.

I can understand the psychological motivation behind the RAF's actions, but I don't think they were based on a very thorough political analysis or well thought-out strategy.


Secondly we have to consider Operation Gladio's involvement in the hijacking of the later waves of the Brigate Rosse, the RAF and the actual construction of the Cellules Combattantes Communistes This is very interesting. I'll have a look at it when I have the time.


Gladio simply stimulated highly untactical and unpopular tactics among the hijacked or self-created armed groups in order to discredit and destroy the revolutionary movement.There are early RAF documents and pamphlets in which the group denounces the German masses for their uselessness and passivity, claiming they were too "blinded by consumerism" and too comfortable to be of any use for the revolution. Arguably some legitimate thoughts there, but how do you fight a war against capital, the state, and the masses all at the same time? The RAF's guerilla tactics were the result of the group's disillusionment with, and lack of faith in the working class. They could only fail.


Still, we must consider the fact that active violence, repression and at times murder is being used by the state and capital as well so simply saying 'violence is wrong in all cases' is just naive.Nobody said so, but violence has got to have a point, a well thought-out stragety, and a potentially positive outcome to it.

EDIT: Has anyone got any info about the Japanese Red Army Faction, esp whether they had contact with the West German group?

[JimmyJazz]

what are peoples views on the RAF?

My view is they get too many threads.

[Revy]

The American version was the Symbionese Liberation Army. Same kind of group, same tactics.

[kersplebedeb]

First, when discussing the RAF, care must be taken to specify who you're talking about. The people who were already underground prior to the Baader library-break? those who joined in the years leading up to 1972? those who joined as a result of the third hungerstrike in 74-5? those who joined in 76-77 and carried out the offensive that culminated in the German Autumn?

Or the subsequent waves, which once again reinvigorated the organization? The ones who thought up the May Paper? The ones who executed Pimental? Or the ones who called a ceasefire? the ones who sent the final communique dissolving the group?

Acting like all of these people - only some of whom were captured, and so the identities of many of whom, or even their numbers, we simply cannot know - all had the exact same strengths and weaknesses and politics is just plain ahistorical.

So that said, on to a couple of specific points:


I can understand the psychological motivation behind the RAF's actions, but I don't think they were based on a very thorough political analysis or well thought-out strategy.

Depends which wave you're talking about. The initial wave was incredibly grounded in the APO, and that at a time that that movement was at its explosive height in the late sixties. Meinhof was probably the best known radical journalist in the Federal Republic, and had been for years - her work in konkret is routinely described as having had an incredible influence on an entire generation.

As for Baader and Ensslin, they were folk heroes on the radical left. Their burning down a couple of department stores to protest the Vietnam War was, in their own words, an error, but it was an error that many young people found "cool" in an immature way.

Horst Mahler was the leading left lawyer in West Berlin. When the state tried to have him disbarred in 1968 it provoked not only an outcry, but also violent rioting, described at the time as the most serious in the city since World War II. (That Mahler became a neo-nazi in the late eighties should not be read too smugly as a shorfalling of the RAF: the group had expelled him way back in 1972 for not playing nicely with others.)

The theories behind the RAF's actions were very well thought out, and were being widely discussed on the left. This doesn't mean they were correct, but the mental image many have of a group of young assholes with disdain for the masses playing at Natural Born Killers has much more to do with the successful psychological warfare campaign carried out by the West German state than any reality.




There are early RAF documents and pamphlets in which the group denounces the German masses for their uselessness and passivity, claiming they were too "blinded by consumerism" and too comfortable to be of any use for the revolution. Arguably some legitimate thoughts there, but how do you fight a war against capital, the state, and the masses all at the same time? The RAF's guerilla tactics were the result of the group's disillusionment with, and lack of faith in the working class. They could only fail.


Which RAF documents? i have just published a book of all RAF documents up to 1977, and while theer is one paper i can think of (Black September) that might honestly be misunderstood as meaning what you say, for the most part the early documents take the opposite approach: they attack the left for being out of touch with the masses, whom they claim are more open to revolutionary ideas than middle class leftists give them credit for.


As they put it in Serve the People (1972):


They see in the political apathy of the proletariat only the apathy, not the protest against a system that has nothing to offer them. They see in the high level of suicide amongst the proletariat only the act of desperation, not the protest. They see in the proletariat’s disinterest in economic struggle only a disinterest in struggle, not the refusal to struggle for a paltry percentage and the right to idiotic consumption. They see in the proletariat’s lack of union organization only the lack of organization, not the mistrust of union bureaucrats as accomplices of capital. They see in the population’s hostility towards the left only the hostility towards the left, not the hatred against those who are socially privileged. They see in our isolation from the masses only our isolation from the masses, not the insane lengths to which the system will go to isolate us from the masses.

Or else later that year, in the tape recorded message they sent to the Red Aid Teach In:


We are of the opinion that the problem these comrades see as lying elsewhere is their own subjective problem, that they project onto the masses their own lack of clarity. They want to identify their own inability—an inability to express solidarity with the masses because of their own privileged class position—as lying with the masses, to present it as an objective problem based in the masses’ need to develop a higher level of consciousness.

What they were saying was that the masses were not the ones who were the problem, it was the middle class left. Now i think - especially in the second quote there - that this perspective has been proven to be incorrect. But note that it's not incorrect for being elitist or too hard on the masses, but it was proven (sadly) incorrect for it was too optimistic about the masses.

Following the summer of 1972, when most of the initial wave of the RAF was captured, the group adopted a far more sober - and realistic - view of "the masses" in the metropole. This is spelled out in Black September, a document releases shortly after the Palestinian action at the Munich Olympics that year. But Black September does not reject the masses either - what it does do is explain that in the First World at that time the consumerist shit the system produces, combined with media brainwashing, was enough to pacify most people. However, they also argued that this situation would only be temporary, as they saw Third World gains as cutting the feet out from under imperialism, leading to a situation where the system would no longer be able to afford to buy off its population. In that situation, they hoped, the European proletariat would rediscover their historic role on the side of the oppressed - and they foresaw the pre-existence of a guerilla tradition as that point as being a strategic necessity.

There's a lot of grapple with when talking about the RAF. And a lot to disagree with them about. But comrades should keep in mind that they were the targets of a dirty tricks campaign and media/police slander on a level at least equal to COINTELPRO in the u.s.a., but which went on for decades. At the same time because they were so critical of the middle class left, they also came under attack from those quarters.

The result is a situation where it is always far better to go back to the source, to read their documents, or else the debates occurring at the time on the left, to be able to decide for yourselves what is valid and what is bullshit in the criticism leveled at them.

[ex_next_worker]

Nicely written, it analytically clears up a lot of the unjustified notions of alienated, detached practice.

[Sasha]

The American version was the Symbionese Liberation Army. Same kind of group, same tactics.

bollox,dont insult our intelgence...
The SLA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symbionese_Liberation_Army) is in no way comparible to the RAF (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Army_Faction), totally diferent group, organisation form, ideaoligy, tactics, level of support etc etc.
the RAF where marxists, the SLA (mostly white) black liberationist
dont make stupid remarks like this, it contaimenates the discusion...

[Wakizashi the Bolshevik]

I like the RAF.
They fought for a good cause, but we can wonder wether it has had the effect wished for.