Originally posted by
[email protected] 19, 2006 07:24 pm
They were kind of anarchists but didn't call themselves anarchists.
You could, I suppose, draw a parallel or two between the RAF and a certain group of anarchists who operated in France at the turn of the 20th century. (?) Both groups criminal activities seem to have attracted the same type of notoriety, for instance; but, that particular question seems a somewhat superficial one to me.
[The French group, by the way, were individualist anarchists. But, for the life of me, I really can't remember their name. Anyone got any ideas?]
The more important question regarding the RAF, in my opinion, is the question of whether the RAF could be considered an authentic expression of working class struggle.
That's certainly a complex question ... and one I don't even pretend to have an answer too. However, I would say that there are a few important things to note when trying to answer that question; things which people probably tend to overlook.
The first of which, concerns their success ... or lack there of. If the RAF are transformed into some kind of political vanguard whose aim was "to awake people [to] make a revolution"; then they failed miserably.
But, and this for me is the important part, does their failure to do this necessarily mean that they didn't represent an authentic strand of working class politics?
Personally, I don't think the RAF, at least the early RAF, can even be judged in this light. I really doubt, originally, Baader & co. had any ideas about being a vanguard which would awaken people.
Personally, I think that early on they can be seen as the political lefts unofficial repressive apparatus. That is, as a group which hoped to counter the German States brutality with their own.
However, did they go beyond that particular horizon? And, if they did, then how does that impact our evaluation of them?
Certainly, the influence of the Stasi is not something one should overlook. But, at what point did they start influencing the RAF? And what kind of influence did they have?
I don't know the answers to the above questions ... and the historical record is probably quite fuzzy on this one. But, I'd speculate that we could make a distinction between the first generation of the RAF -- and possibly the early second generation -- and the later RAF.
A distinction that revolves around the Stasi's influence and the role that played in transforming the class character of the group. (Well, it's groups if we make the distinction.)
Additionally, their links with other groups, such as the PFLP, needs to factor into our thinking. After all, there's a lot to be learned from the friends people choose.
And, relating to that, we have the Movement 2 June -- who, I suppose, you could call the anarchist RAF.
They are less illustrious than the RAF; but, at the same time, some of the more questionable things relating to the RAF are not found within the Movement 2 June. Which, of course, makes them far easier to support.
However, been as the groups, political philosophy aside, acted in ways which were fundamentally identical; would it be possible to support one and not tother? And on what grounds?
That is, could someone make the case that one current was an expression of working class struggle, whilst the other wasn't?
Personally, I think the answers to these questions could probably be found in the publications of revolutionary groups in Germany from that era. How rank and file militants viewed these two groups, would help indicate, in my opinion, the class characteristics of these groups.
I've not seen any publications myself, but if someone knew of something from back then, then that could be very informative.
It would certainly be more informative than most stuff written now. In an era where the left seems to have posthumously transformed the RAF into an icon. Europe's "Che". Basically, revolutionary chic.
And I think looking past the RAF that is a trendy icon of leftism, and analysing their class character instead, is really what needs to be done. But it's something that doesn't really seem to have been done -- judging by how hard it is to find a decent revolutionary analysis of them on the internet.
_ _ _ _ _
Sorry, that turned out to be much longer than I intended.