Red Brigades, Italy

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

A friend of mine who is leaning towards Marxism has some family from Italy. She wants to know about the Red Brigades in Italy.

I have to say that, aside from knowing that they were Marxist-Leninists, I know nothing about them, but i'd like to be able to come back to her with some good knowledge, especially if it may enlighten her about leftism.

Could anybody provide me with a good overview of the group?

[RED DAVE]

Terrorism and Marxism-Leninism do not generally go together.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Brigades

RED DAVE

[Os Cangaceiros]

We studied them a bit (along with RAF) in European history class in college. Unlike the RAF, they had a bit of popular support (or rather their support wasn't exclusively limited to the intelligentsia), mostly in Northern industrial cities in Italy. The execution of Aldo Moro was probably their biggest "accomplishment"...how they managed to take out all of his bodyguards so skillfully has been a matter of speculation. That's all I really remember, though.

Whatever one's opinions on their goals or actions, they did provide the Italian government with a nice excuse to crack down on communist movements in Italy.

[Who?]

Terrorism and Marxism-Leninism do not generally go together.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Brigades

ED DAVE

I suppose you don't support any other militant Marxist-Leninist groups such as the Weather Underground (historically), FARC, PFLP, etc.

[Proletarian Ultra]

They had support for a while, but totally shat the bed with Aldo Moro.

More than likely they had some 'help' from elements within the security state, who didn't want the Communist Party in government.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladio_in_Italy

I suspect similar games are going on in greece right now. A bomb inside the interior ministry? Srsly?

[RED DAVE]

I suppose you don't support any other militant Marxist-Leninist groups such as the Weather Underground (historically), FARC, PFLP, etc.Militancy and terrorism are not the same thing. The Weather Underground was a disastrous mistake in which a small bunch of people attempted to subsitute themselves for mass action or stimulate mass action by terrorism. Not cool.

FARC, PFLP, etc., are, as I understand them, in a different category: mass movements that have chosen to use violence, with various relationships to the working class. These have to be analyzed and categorized individually according to their class make-ups, program, strategy, etc.

RED DAVE

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Were they a paramilitary group or a genuine M-L movement?

I'm always a bit suspicious when I see 'militant group' and Marxist-Leninist in the same sentence on a site like Wikipedia. Always sounds like anti-communist talk to me, instantly linking Marxism with some sort of 'terrorism'.

[Tavarisch_Mike]

To understand them you must also stude the italian labour movement in the 60s-70s when the factory occupations and autonomous forms of organizing was re-installed among workers. In this period the the fascists made a come back and did themselfes a lot of terrorist attacks, like placing a bomb in a bank (Milano?) wich killed 7 people.
The labour movement had to react against this and started a violent campaigne against the fascists. I dont know so much more but i know theres a lot of literature on the subject so i recomend to study! :)

[Os Cangaceiros]

To understand them you must also stude the italian labour movement in the 60s-70s when the factory occupations and autonomous forms of organizing was re-installed among workers. In this period the the fascists made a come back and did themselfes a lot of terrorist attacks, like placing a bomb in a bank (Milano?) wich killed 7 people.
The labour movement had to react against this and started a violent campaigne against the fascists. I dont know so much more but i know theres a lot of literature on the subject so i recomend to study! :)

The neo-nazi bombing Italicus bombing in '74 killed a dozen people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italicus_Express_bombing_1974

[Tavarisch_Mike]

The neo-nazi bombing Italicus bombing in '74 killed a dozen people.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italicus_Express_bombing_1974

My bad. :blushing:

[Who?]

Militancy and terrorism are not the same thing. The Weather Underground was a disastrous mistake in which a small bunch of people attempted to subsitute themselves for mass action or stimulate mass action by terrorism. Not cool.

FARC, PFLP, etc., are, as I understand them, in a different category: mass movements that have chosen to use violence, with various relationships to the working class. These have to be analyzed and categorized individually according to their class make-ups, program, strategy, etc.

RED DAVE

Fair enough, so the primary factor in differing violent mass movements from individual terrorist organizations is the level of support they receive from the working class, which I'm assuming the Red Brigades did not have?

[Delenda Carthago]

Red Brigades came in an era that people went to jail for publishing books.In an era that cops was shooting with real arms to the riots.In an era that the workers movement was very strong, and the Communist Party very revisionist.In an era after the bologna revolt in 1974.

Red Brigades had 10.000 members.If you call that "terrorist",you are a fuckin PRICK.They were a revolutionary army.There is no comparasing to RAF either,other the era.


See "lavorare con lentezza" to understand some things about the era.

[Qayin]

Long Live the Red Brigades, Red Army faction, Weather Underground, Black Liberation Army and all the other Guerrilla Movements in the Imperialist Nations lest we forget.

[Delenda Carthago]

Long Live the Red Brigades, Red Army faction, Weather Underground, Black Liberation Army and all the other Guerrilla Movements in the Imperialist Nations lest we forget.
I have to disagree.Beeing pro-urban guerillas is the same for me like beeing against it.It is wrong to judge the means and potition yourself on a subject.Red Brigades,RAF,N17,WU etc where totaly different situations,by different people,with a big variety of targets,with a huge variety of ideologies and political believes...

[thälmann]

i think the red brigades made the mistake not to build up a political organisation to lead the struggle. but to call them individual terrorists is stupid, they had more support in factorys and universitys as for example the pflp or the maoists in india...they were much more then 10.000, all italian armed groups together in italy that time had about 40.000 activists. and, as somebody mentioned before, the state along with fascists committed massive massacers in italy. the "communist"party was totally revisionist, they became on of the biggest enemys of the workers movement.they tried to go into the goverment with the conservatives...

[blake 3:17]

A friend of mine who is leaning towards Marxism has some family from Italy. She wants to know about the Red Brigades in Italy.


I don't that much about the internal politics of Italian Red Brigades, but what I would tell folks new and interested in socialist politics is that they feared a return of fascism, were disturbed by passivity on the part of "official" Marxists, and were pretty naive. All of Western Europe was also totally freaked by the possibility of the Col War going nuclear, and parts of the Far Left resisted violently.


In his memoirs, Michael Albert, of Znet, talks about how he might have gone terrorist/mad-bomber at certain points if he had known what was really going on. I believe the example he uses is working at MIT a few hundred feet from where murderous anti-insurgency ( ie anti-Vietnamese) helicopter technology was being planned and built. He expresses both gratitude and regret for not knowing what was happening next door. If he'd known he'd probably be in jail to this day.




Long Live the Red Brigades, Red Army faction, Weather Underground, Black Liberation Army and all the other Guerrilla Movements in the Imperialist Nations lest we forget.

Many of us here oppose these types of groups, while being sympathetic to some of their aims or right to exist.

There's been some excellent writing on the Weather Underground in the last few years, which is critical but attempts to understand it. One of the things I've found of particular interest is that a fair number of Weathermen who stayed underground for extended periods have done really good work in the last few years.

[The Douche]

I think its interesting to see people constantly harping on about the "failure" of the WU. Didn't the war in vietnam end? Don't you think that the armed groups attacking the state/robbing banks here on the homefront had something to do with it?

Remember, the weathermen were not just the WU, they were also the leading faction in SDS. They were mobilising tens of thousands of students across the country.

Did they fail as a movement for the emancipation of US workers? Yes. Were they an important (maybe even necessary) part of the anti-imperialist movement to stop the slaughter of vietnamese workers? Yes.

Would the current wars still be going on if there was an organization bringing those wars back here, to the homefront? Would the people of the US want the wars to continue if it meant their cities were part of the battlefield?

[Os Cangaceiros]

The WU's primary goal (and someone can correct me if I'm wrong on this) was to "bring the war home".

In that sense, I don't think that they were a complete failure.

[Qayin]

I have to disagree.Beeing pro-urban guerillas is the same for me like beeing against it.It is wrong to judge the means and potition yourself on a subject.Red Brigades,RAF,N17,WU etc where totaly different situations,by different people,with a big variety of targets,with a huge variety of ideologies and political believes...
I am for all those groups. I've looked into them all, the states was threatened and scared shitless by many of them just look at the RAF. They walked the walk and many of them gave there lives for it, they decided theory wasn't enough given there conditions and took action.

The WU was to "Bring the war home" to end American Imperialist intervention in South East Asia.

The RAF was to end American Occupation of West Germany and halt the support given to the Americans by the German Government. At the same time exposing the German Government for what it was being former Nazi's were still in positions of Government and Business bringing out the Police State and what they viewed as Fascism. They thought that bringing out the system for what it is would inspire an uprising, they were wrong in perspective but had some support and gave there lives for it.

And so forth...

[Magón]

I think its interesting to see people constantly harping on about the "failure" of the WU. Didn't the war in vietnam end? Don't you think that the armed groups attacking the state/robbing banks here on the homefront had something to do with it?

They did probably have some small effect, but nothing compared to the protests, etc. that took place, and already the civil unrest such as in Detroit, etc.

[Qayin]

They did probably have some small effect, but nothing compared to the protests, etc. that took place, and already the civil unrest such as in Detroit, etc.

They all together play there role

[Magón]

They all together play there role

Of course, that was never in question.:thumbup1:

[The Douche]

They did probably have some small effect, but nothing compared to the protests, etc. that took place, and already the civil unrest such as in Detroit, etc.

I can tell you one thing for sure, protests had no effect at all. Protests do not and cannot end wars. (see Iraq)

The issue is, the WU played a leading role in the politics of the youth of the country, and they made the jump from protest, to riot, to urban guerrilla. They weren't just some random group, they were the leaders of the political youth in the US. Their lead to guerrillaism represented a clear threat to the safety of the state and its ability to conduct war.

[Magón]

I can tell you one thing for sure, protests had no effect at all. Protests do not and cannot end wars. (see Iraq)

The issue is, the WU played a leading role in the politics of the youth of the country, and they made the jump from protest, to riot, to urban guerrilla. They weren't just some random group, they were the leaders of the political youth in the US. Their lead to guerrillaism represented a clear threat to the safety of the state and its ability to conduct war.

Protests come in all shapes and sizes, with people doing different things to protest, besides just the normal marching in the streets. At Universities, you had student protests that had them locking themselves in various student buildings, and blocking various places. Iraq is different, because it didn't have the charge that Vietnam did. The two are similar in a way, but you didn't hear people protesting everyday somewhere out against the war in Iraq like you did in Vietnam.

Protesting had a major part, because another form of protesting was also burning draft notices, etc. that were sent to those who were protesting the war. The WU's part was much smaller in size than the various forms of protest that were in a peaceful manner, than actual violence. The riots in Detroit did little to help, but the various sit-ins and such played a major roll. Because it showed the government, that the American people weren't for this war anymore, and through these mass protests, it really put a damper on the Draft. Things like the WU have their place, but in the case of Vietnam had little to do with it's end.

[The Douche]

You're wrong. The Iraq war had larger protests than the vietnam war did. Protests do not stop wars, and occupying college buildings certainly doesn't stop wars.

[Magón]

You're wrong. The Iraq war had larger protests than the vietnam war did. Protests do not stop wars, and occupying college buildings certainly doesn't stop wars.

If protests during Vietnam didn't help stop the war, than the WU certainly had no effect on the war by those standards of thinking. During Vietnam, you always heard of protests happening, but during Iraq you hardly heard a thing, with very few protests being done. They may have been done in mass, but they were too few. During Vietnam, it was completely different.

And I agree, that occupying college buildings and other buildings, doesn't stop a war, but it's the meaning behind them, and the majority of those taking part in the protest and sit-ins, that stop the war and show that people don't want any part in it, and don't want it to continue. Nowadays, you hardly hear anything like that, but during Vietnam, protests of all shapes and sizes did help put a cease to the war in Vietnam. You also nowadays, don't have a draft to contend with like you did back then. That was also a major protest to the war, and why so many people protested and really helped get the war in Vietnam over with.

Do a little reading up on Vietnam protests, rallies, etc. and you'll see how much of an impact they really had compared to the WU's intervention.

[The Douche]

I have friends who lead the student movement against the vietnam war.

I organized mass protests against the war in Iraq.


You're a straight up moron if you think people holding signs in the street/general discontent shapes foreign policy.

You think we can end capitalism with a big protest too?:laugh:

[Magón]

I have friends who lead the student movement against the vietnam war.

I organized mass protests against the war in Iraq.


You're a straight up moron if you think people holding signs in the street/general discontent shapes foreign policy.

You think we can end capitalism with a big protest too?:laugh:

Then what was the point of you organizing protests against Iraq, if they were inevitably futile to do? They do have more of an impact, than you realize, especially during the Vietnam War. When you see people protesting on TV, burning their Draft Cards, etc., that puts a damper on the Government. I never said to end capitalism with protest, I never even hinted or mentioned anything like that. I don't know where you're drawing that card from, but you shouldn't, it holds nothing to this discussion.

And so you know one guy, who lead one student movement during Vietnam somewhere, that's fine. But I don't know what you're getting at with that comment? Just one protest isn't enough, that's why there were hundreds of different protests. Plus, there were hundred of them around the world too. Not just in the US.

Protesting does a lot more than you think, especially when something like Kent State gets broadcast across the news. You know, the shooting of unarmed protesting students at Kent State in 1970. That had tons of people crying out in outrage and anger, protesting even more the US involvement in the Vietnam War. Along with that, I never said just holding up signs to protest was the best way. I just said that there are various forms of protest, that occurred during those years that got nation wide attention. You don't think a whole nation going against it's government during a war, is protesting? :rolleyes:

[bcbm]

brigate rosse started from a relatively positive perspective, doing fliering at factories and eventually moving to actions like sabotaging cars of bosses, etc. by the time they were kidnapping aldo moro, however, they had moved from being a positive force in the revolutionary struggle to a detriment because of the switch from mass autonomous action to clandestine, specialist operations. and as far as the 70's urban guerrilla goes, the BR were about as specialist as they come- "memoirs of an italian terrorist" by "giorgio" gives an insight into this world and i think a lot of the people here who romanticize this sort of struggle would probably have hated the reality- lots of reading newspapers, following people for weeks or months and general thumb twiddling with the possiblity of betrayal, arrest or manipulation around every corner.

it is important to recognize the context- yes the police were shooting rioters, etc. but by 77 the rioters were responding with arms of their own, often en masse and breaking off from demonstrations for that very purpose. the switch to a clandestine army was precisely what the state wanted in order to head off the looming civil war.

books worth reading on the subject, in my view, are the aforementioned memoir by giorgio, "strike one to educate one hundred," a very pro-br text and "never again without a rifle" by allessandro silj. for a small look at the general situation in italy, "armed struggle in italy 1977-78" is good.


I think its interesting to see people constantly harping on about the "failure" of the WU. Didn't the war in vietnam end? Don't you think that the armed groups attacking the state/robbing banks here on the homefront had something to do with it?honestly? no. the groups laying bombs and robbing banks were, despite being at one point a leading faction in the student movement, an isolated minority by the early 70's- their "days of rage" drew fewer rioters than your average summit hop today and that during a much more militant time period. certainly they had some level of support within the movement because they were able to survive clandestinely for so long but their actions didn't represent much of a threat to the established order and i think its giving them far, far too much credit to say they had any real impact on nixon's decisions regarding vietnam.


Would the current wars still be going on if there was an organization bringing those wars back here, to the homefront? Would the people of the US want the wars to continue if it meant their cities were part of the battlefield?if a small minority of activists started planting bombs, i think it is pretty obvious how "the people of the us" would react, and an increased desire to end the wars wouldn't be part of it.

as to the question of protests and iraq- dockworkers refusing to transport military shipments would do more than protests or bombs to stop the war. involve truckers, soldiers and other elements who can blockade the flow of material support for the war and you've got a serious disruption that could easily become lethal to the war effort with enough support from outside, non-essential actors. capital and its wars are only threatened by the disruption of economic flow, not through symbolic actions- whether bombs or protests.

[The Douche]

You don't think a whole nation going against it's government during a war, is protesting?

What the fuck are you talking about? You're out of your mind. If mass discontent could effect the way the world worked then we would have been out of capitalism a long time ago. You think leaders engage in wars cause they feel like it? And they'll just stop when the people yell loud enough? I have a hard time believing you're that naive.


their actions didn't represent much of a threat to the established order and i think its giving them far, far too much credit to say they had any real impact on nixon's decisions regarding vietnam.


I don't think the WU ended the war in vietnam, but if we look at it in a world context it had to play a part. There were armed groups springing up all over the first world and being supported to an extent by the general population. (RAF, BR, WU, SLA, BPP, BLA, just to name a few off the top of my head) This was a time where mass movements had failed and the idea of armed resistance was becoming more and more acceptable and the student movement was branching out into the working class. (and this was happening across the western world)


if a small minority of activists started planting bombs, i think it is pretty obvious how "the people of the us" would react, and an increased desire to end the wars wouldn't be part of it.


I agree, I shouldn't have brought up the issue of the mass reaction to it. Public opinion would probably shift in support of the war. But effective armed struggle could potentially cause enough damage, or be sustained long enough to drain the public of their will to allow the wars. Its elitist, anti-working class, and absurd to say as a communist. But I think it is realistic as a tactic. And forces us to come to the descision of what is necessary to end the slaughter of worker's abroad. (even if it is at the cost of the movement here)


as to the question of protests and iraq- dockworkers refusing to transport military shipments would do more than protests or bombs to stop the war. involve truckers, soldiers and other elements who can blockade the flow of material support for the war and you've got a serious disruption that could easily become lethal to the war effort with enough support from outside, non-essential actors. capital and its wars are only threatened by the disruption of economic flow, not through symbolic actions- whether bombs or protests.

I was hoping that poster Nin could come to this conclusion.;)

[AK]

Red Brigades had 10.000 members.If you call that "terrorist",you are a fuckin PRICK.They were a revolutionary army.There is no comparasing to RAF either,other the era.
The size of an organisation does not affect whether it can be called terrorist or not. Terrorism is a specific tactic, entailing the use of terror as a means of coercion. Insurgent groups, clandestine intelligence organisations, popular resistance movements, the police and the army can all use the tactic.

They might be considered a revolutionary army in some peoples' eyes (not mine; what did they do for the emancipation of the working class and the establishment of socialism?), but you can't blow up a social relationship - and that's where many of the various communist guerrilla groups (especially those operating within the first world/the imperialist states) that used - dare I say - the tactic of terrorism went wrong.

[AK]

You think we can end capitalism with a big protest too?:laugh:
There's a theory...
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c90/dogfromhell/general-strike1.jpg

Well, sorta.

[Victory]

Terrorism and Marxism-Leninism do not generally go together.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_Brigades

RED DAVE

You're an idiot.

What is terrorism about Marxists taking prisoner Capitalists, US Generals and committing assassinations against the Ruling Class? - Nothing

You are an accurate example of why the far-right label the left, the "Looney Leftists", because all you do is talk about Revolution and shout "Nazi!" at people on the right.

I have no time for wing-bags who only ever engage themselves in political-chit-chat. I think you'd be better off for the revolutionary movement non-existent, meaning dead, because you're so useless and pathetic that you make the Communist movement actually look like "Leftist Looney’s".

[Sam_b]

Unlike the RAF, they had a bit of popular support

The RAF garnered a significant amount of popular support which was not exclusively academic. At one point it was estimated that one in three West erman youths expressed sympathy with the RAF and its cause, and many expressed further attitudes in the escalation of the Vietnam war.

[Sam_b]

I have no time for wing-bags who only ever engage themselves in political-chit-chat. I think you'd be better off for the revolutionary movement non-existent, meaning dead, because you're so useless and pathetic that you make the Communist movement actually look like "Leftist Looney’s".

Ironic coming from the cyber-warrior that is making death threats to other users. Easy to do things from your computer, isn't it?

Idiot.

[Yazman]

To user Victory:

Please do not flame other users. As this is the Learning forum, this is exceptionally inappropriate and as such there will be dire consequences if I see anybody flaming or trolling in this forum at all. Such posting is explicitly banned on Revleft, and especially so in the Learning board. If I see another post like this from you, you're in real trouble.

To user AK:
The sentiment is appreciated but you've essentially made a post that constitutes spam here. Please try to refrain from making one-liner/picture posts as this isn't an image board. Its ok to post pics, just make sure if you're going to do it that there's something substantial in your post text-wise as well.

To user Sam_b:
In future its better to just not bother replying to such a worthless post. I am not giving you a warning for this but don't fight fire with fire, please.

This post constitutes a verbal warning to users Victory and AK.

[The Douche]

There's a theory...
http://i25.photobucket.com/albums/c90/dogfromhell/general-strike1.jpg

Well, sorta.

The general strike is a valid tool in the arsenal of the working class. Its not a protest because it has actual results. As bcbm said, and as I was hoping Nin would figure out, "protesting" is impotent, you need to make sure your actions have an actual effect on the ruling class. And a general strike can do that. (when combined with other tactics of course)