horst mahler was expelled from the raf in 1974.

the raf was a product of it's time and place, and a good case study of a failed guerilla movement.

the weather underground organisation in the united states is a much better model to aspire to if one was interested in going in that trajectory.

when you start attacking people rather than very carefully targeting property, you reduce yourself and your struggle to the level of the enemy you are fighting - and they are the masters of that terrain. even on the level of property damage - there is the danger of escalation and again you are just playing out a role - a niche market the state has already cornered.

groups from the era of the raf had their successes as well as their failures, best to examine it for what it is - history.

no comment

"Reality" - I mostly agree with your analysis, but I struggle to see where the RAF produced ANY significant "successes"

"Oktoberfest" - I agree that unlike the Red Brigades in Italy the RAF were probably not Gladio, ie - not manipulated by the American backed State security network called Gladio (although there's no real proof either way). As this post says, they were instead manipulated by the East German backed State security service!

the stasi gave them money and weapons but they werent manipulated and controlled. GDR just wanted to help them destabilize the west they didnt create or organise RAF.

important to bear in mind is that all political organisations are infiltrated and manipulated by the security services, every single one. it is inescapable. no single individual is in control of their actions - mind control machines and thought generators are installed in many harmless-looking domestic appliances. Even those who are not manipulated by the security services end up infiltrated because their minds are dominated by the thought patterns of the machine, as we are mostly robots receiving orders, but that can be prevented by wearing a tin-foil hat and saying the magic word "Anarchism".

It's not news: Horst Mahler's expulsion from RAF in the 70s, his acts of betrayal, and later conversion to fascism are all very well known. And this article offers no new analysis of any of that. Do a bit of googling and you can find plenty.

In any case, for anarchists and anti-authoritarians interested in the history of armed struggle in germany the RAF are hardly the most interesting group. They were old style leninists with a very hierarchical organisation. There were other much more interesting german marxist groups: the revolutionary cells (RZ), june 2 movement, and perhaps most of all the feminist guerilla group Red Zora. They organised with little hierarchy, believed that armed struggle was only a part of bigger movement building and so tried hard not to isolate themselves from everyday life, unlike the vanguardist "undergrounds". And their tactics semed to work well: they had many successful attacks on property without anyone being killed or anyone ever being convicted. See here for their classic interview translated into english:  http://theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Ann_Hansen__Julie_Belmas__This_Is_Not_A_Love_Story__Armed_Struggle_Against_The_Institutions_Of_Patriarchy.html

Still, none of the german groups i think were self-avowedly anarchist or anti-authoritarian: for the history of explicitly anarchist armed struggle in late 20th century europe you have to look elsewhere, italy, for example. Though there were certainly plenty of anarchists active in different armed struggle movements in France, Belgium, Holland, Spain, Greece, and more. Most of those groups had little or nothing in common with the hierarchical and state-funded RAF model.

There's lots of interesting and complex history around. If we want to have these debates about the value or otherwise of various militant tactics, let's do it from a position of knowledge rather than ignorance, and not make simplistic arguments from bad examples. Nowadays with the internet it's not hard to do some reading if you take the time.

'Baader-Meinhof actions started with non-violent arson attacks on department stores, carried out to express "solidarity" with the Vietcong, but escalated through an almost inevitable cycle-of-violence into attacks which killed 34 people, including bombings which killed completely innocent bystanders.'

...and that is the real point of this indymedia article. the article by so-called 'against all authority' is intended to suggest direct action property destruction leads to killing 'innocent' traffic cops and servants of the rich like the supposedly bloodthirsty extremists of the RAF who in turn all like Horst Mahler turn out to be fash.

therefore, in the intended persuasive underlying argument of our info war operative, is the message: anarchist/insurrectionary direct action = NAZISM. beware, Indymedia readers!

Your analysis of my motive is wrong. My intention is not to suggest that "anarchist/ insurrectionary direct action = NAZISM" (sic), my intention in specific terms is to remind people that the Baader-Meinhof had a relationship with Nazi gun-nuts long before the alleged conversion of Horst Mahler, and in general terms is to point out that radical extremists can often be manipulated by VERY strange people (Horst Mahler again). Believe me I'm in favour of direct action, what I'm not in favour of is terrorism. The distinction's not hard to understand.

Your language is revealing however, as the last thing the Baader-Meinhof represented was (to quote your words) "Insurrection". I'm guessing maybe you're the person who posts on Indymedia using the name "Insurrectionary Anarchist"? If that's the case, this post was aimed specifically at YOU. The Baader-Meinhof weren't Anarchists, in fact they were ideologically anti-Anarchist, and they weren't insurrectionary either.

Even if I'm wrong about you however, still an insurrection is a situation where a whole community rise up in open revolt against their oppressors. Terrorism is where a tiny minority take it upon themselves to stand as judge, jury and executioner, dispensing murderous "justice" on people (who often, in practice, turn out to be innocent), arrogantly pretending to speak for the wider community. For reason of its inherent authoritarianism, in practice terrorism tends (although obviously it's not a hard and fast rule) to appeal more to followers of Mao, Lenin and Stalin etc - the kind of authoritarian dictators who made a point of killing real Anarchists whenever they could.

I'm very glad my critiques of terrorist bullshit have elicited these kinds of reactions however, as this is exactly what they were intended to do.

Have a nice day.

The comment reading... "important to bear in mind is that all political organisations are infiltrated and manipulated by the security services, every single one. it is inescapable. no single individual is in control of their actions - mind control machines and thought generators are installed in many harmless-looking domestic appliances. Even those who are not manipulated by the security services end up infiltrated because their minds are dominated by the thought patterns of the machine, as we are mostly robots receiving orders, but that can be prevented by wearing a tin-foil hat and saying the magic word "Anarchism"...

WAS NOT POSTED BY MYSELF - sounds like Jeff Marsh (again) to me (so if Indy mods could remove it that'd be appreciated)

yes obviously the RAF were not an anarchist or insurrectionary formation. why the interest in Baader-Meinhoff? are you suggesting that the context within which this news article was posted was not that of Indymedia coverage of anarchist direct action? the only one conflating insurrectional anarchist action with the RAF is this articles author, in the round about and indirect way of disinfo. maybe your honest and that is not your intention, but it certainly seems like that.

anyway, as for what insurrection is its uprizing against the imposed system, starting from the individual and collectivising in greater expressions (the affinity group, armed cell, riot, liberated zone, insurrectional commune, etc).