The German Autumn

[Chaos]

(I don´t have much time to post right now, but I will elaborate more later on.)

Many of you probably know what the term "German Autumn" ("Der Deutsche Herbst") refers to - the spate of terrorist incidents in autumn ´77, especially the kidnapping (and later, murder) of the chairman of the employers´ association, Hanns Martin Schleyer, the kidnapping of the Lufthansa airliner "Landshut", which ended with the plane´s pilot being murdered, and the suicide of three terrorists (and one attempted suicide) of the RAF (Rote Armee Fraktion) imprisoned in Stuttgart, Germany.

That was thirty years ago now, but, especially in times like this, when terrorism is threat that people are most aware of, I think that the lessons of the German Autumn are still significant.

The most important lesson, I think, is that harsher laws, less freedom, and the recurse towards illegal measures to fight terrorism, did not - I repeat, NOT - contribute towards an end of the terrorist threat. In many ways, they merely helped the next generation of RAF terrorists become more radical.
What did, in the end, cause the RAF to declare its dissolution in the 90´s was then, finally, people stopped being afraid of them, and that they slipped from the headlines. A terrorist group that, ever in its best days, never had more than 20 members or so, and that killed all of a few dozen people over the course of 30 years, is not and can never be a threat to the existence of a nation, or to its free democratic order. The only way by which this order can be destroyed is if its citizens are sufficiently terrified that they allow their government to destroy this order, under the pretext of fighting terrorism.

 

[Oliver]

Amen

 

[Chaos]

Bumped.

There is now a "companion thread", "German Autumn Conspiracy Theories", in the conspiracies forum, which also includes some more information on the events back then.

 

[Pardalis]

How would you compare these terrorists to Islamic terrorists?

 

[Chaos]

How would you compare these terrorists to Islamic terrorists?

Hard to compare, that.

RAF´s famous attacks were on VIPs, like politicians, CEOs and such; they bombed US targets in Germany on two occasions, and there was one attack against the publishing company Springer. As a rule, they were going for maximum publicity, as opposed to maximum body count.

Besides, they were not aiming to exterminate anyone; they thought that, if they made the public aware of the government´s "fascist oppression" well enough, they could spark a socialist revolution. They were purely political terrorists, not religious fanatics... okay, sure, they were fanatical enough about their politics, even the ones who are still alive mostly are, but these political view take somewhat less distortion of reality in order to make sense, compared to religious fundamentalism - and they started out with what many people, even moderates, consider more or less legitimate grievances.

I mean, sure they were still terrorists, and pretty ruthless ones at that - the Schleyer kidnapping, or the abduction and murder of US soldier Edward Pimenthal proved that. But compared to Islamic terrorist, they were almost civilized. Almost.

 

[dudalb]

I might well argue that Islamic terrorists are more ruthless and therefore more dangerous then the German terrorists ever where.

 

[Chaos]

I might well argue that Islamic terrorists are more ruthless and therefore more dangerous then the German terrorists ever where.

You won´t hear me disagree.

To a certain degree, the danger posed is also derived from goals, not just ruthlessness. A political wake-up call, even a bloody one, is not as dangerous as a holy war.

From what I heard from people who lived through that time (my parents, for example - I was only six months old at the time) the episode must have been roughly as scary as 9/11 and such are nowadays. But, looking back, one could almost get nostalgic for terrorist who do not intentionally aim at undiscriminate mass murder. Almost.

 

[CFLarsen]

(I don´t have much time to post right now, but I will elaborate more later on.)

Many of you probably know what the term "German Autumn" ("Der Deutsche Herbst") refers to - the spate of terrorist incidents in autumn ´77, especially the kidnapping (and later, murder) of the chairman of the employers´ association, Hanns Martin Schleyer, the kidnapping of the Lufthansa airliner "Landshut", which ended with the plane´s pilot being murdered, and the suicide of three terrorists (and one attempted suicide) of the RAF (Rote Armee Fraktion) imprisoned in Stuttgart, Germany.

That was thirty years ago now, but, especially in times like this, when terrorism is threat that people are most aware of, I think that the lessons of the German Autumn are still significant.

The most important lesson, I think, is that harsher laws, less freedom, and the recurse towards illegal measures to fight terrorism, did not - I repeat, NOT - contribute towards an end of the terrorist threat. In many ways, they merely helped the next generation of RAF terrorists become more radical.
What did, in the end, cause the RAF to declare its dissolution in the 90´s was then, finally, people stopped being afraid of them, and that they slipped from the headlines. A terrorist group that, ever in its best days, never had more than 20 members or so, and that killed all of a few dozen people over the course of 30 years, is not and can never be a threat to the existence of a nation, or to its free democratic order. The only way by which this order can be destroyed is if its citizens are sufficiently terrified that they allow their government to destroy this order, under the pretext of fighting terrorism.

Tell us the story of Berufsverbot.

 

[Chaos]

Tell us the story of Berufsverbot.

Which story are you referring to?

I know what the word Berufsverbot means, but I cannot, at the moment, see what it has to do with this?

 

[Darth Rotor]

You won´t hear me disagree.

To a certain degree, the danger posed is also derived from goals, not just ruthlessness. A political wake-up call, even a bloody one, is not as dangerous as a holy war.

From what I heard from people who lived through that time (my parents, for example - I was only six months old at the time) the episode must have been roughly as scary as 9/11 and such are nowadays. But, looking back, one could almost get nostalgic for terrorist who do not intentionally aim at undiscriminate mass murder. Almost.

When I lived in Germany as a boy, the Bader Meinhof gang was big news. They were put paid to, IIRC, in the early 1970's.

It seems to me that the RAF was similar to the Greek 17th November group in terms of its focused acts of violence against particular targets for discrete political aims.

DR

 

[CFLarsen]

Which story are you referring to?

I know what the word Berufsverbot means, but I cannot, at the moment, see what it has to do with this?

You cannot tell the story of German terrorism in the 70's without also telling the story of Berufsverbot.

 

[Darth Rotor]

You cannot tell the story of German terrorism in the 70's without also telling the story of Berufsverbot.

I am so glad you cleared that up.

For those not psychic enough to read CF Larsen's mind, here is a short summary of the law in question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berufsverbot

Enjoy.

ETA: from that link.

The 1972 Anti-Radical Decree

Berufsverbot is the common name for the Anti-Radical Decree (Radikalenerlass), instituted by West German Chancellor Willy Brandt and the premiers of the Länder on January 28, 1972. Under this law, people with radical views could be forbidden to work as civil servants (Beamten) and in other public sector occupations such as teaching. The decree was a response to radical terrorism by the Red Army Faction.

The law was applied unevenly after 1979, and many of the Länder repealed the relevant legislation.

DR

 

[CFLarsen]

I am so glad you cleared that up.

For those not psychic enough to read CF Larsen's mind, here is a short summary of the law in question: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berufsverbot

Enjoy.

ETA: from that link.

I wasn't asking people to read my mind. I was asking Chaos, being a German, and therefore, presumably in-the-know, to explain the background for the policy of banning Germans of particular political observances from obtaining certain kinds of jobs.

 

[Pardalis]

I always imagined Germany like this heavenly democracy, where people could say **** and **** whenever they liked...

 

[Darth Rotor]

I wasn't asking people to read my mind. I was asking Chaos, being a German, and therefore, presumably in-the-know, to explain the background for the policy of banning Germans of particular political observances from obtaining certain kinds of jobs.

You left it to me to try and put a little E into JREF. You get the assist, I get the goal. We are quite the team, eh Claus?

DR

 

[Gurdur]

I always imagined Germany like this heavenly democracy, where people could say **** and **** whenever they liked...

****, ****, no? **** **** for a ****. ****, if **** ***'* **** a ****, **** 'em.

.... We are quite the team, eh Claus?

**** ! **** !!! **** !!!

How would you compare these terrorists to Islamic terrorists?

Guns don't kill people, terrorists kill people.

I might well argue that Islamic terrorists are more ruthless and therefore more dangerous then the German terrorists ever where.

Dubious.

You cannot tell the story of German terrorism in the 70's without also telling the story of Berufsverbot.

Oh, humbug. You cannot tell the story of the German Autumn without telling tons of stories, ranging from the PLO, PFLP, the Japanese Red Army, CIA, USA, and Claus Larsen.

OK, I made that last one up. But **** that. We would be here for eternity if we're going to tell the stories in full. And Chaos' point is very much there; whether we discuss the Berufsverbot and also the argument on profiling at the time (why DID you leave that one out? VERY remiss of you), it makes no difference at all to Chaos' point.

.... ....

One minor note: the Federal govt cabinet during much of that time was also known to some as the Lieutenant's Cabinet, owing to several of its members having been lieutenants in the army in WW2, and bringing with them that mentality; a kind of can-do must-do improvise mentality.

 

[Childlike Empress]

Hard to compare, that. [...] they thought that, if they made the public aware of the government´s "fascist oppression" well enough, they could spark a socialist revolution.

I think that that's an interesting parallel to the strategies of Qutb/MB/Al Qaida. In the beginning the RAF and especially Ulrike Meinhof, who was a well respected journalist and even part of the establishment, had a lot of support from the radical left* but after the group's actions became more and more extreme due to the influence of Andreas Baader and they didn't care about killing innocents as "collateral damage" anymore, the support vanished.

Same happened in Egypt, Algeria and elsewhere when the early "Islamists" tried to show the populations of these countries (by killing innocents) that their governments were completely corrupted by the evil degenerated western influence and by that to initiate a religious revolution.

Nearly the same strategy, absolutely the same result: Humans in general don't dig murder, so the terrorists lost.

Maybe the parallels go even further in that the "third generation" of the RAF on the one hand and Al Qaida on the other were used by other interests to further their goals, but i haven't researched the topic of the "third generation" RAF enough to participate in your CT-Thread, Chaos.

* That was the reason for the Berufsverbot, CFLarsen, and while that may on the surface sound ridiculous and was far from perfectly fair, i think Brandt and Schmidt handeled the "German Autumn" all in all very professional without unnecessary alarmism.

 

[Oliver]

Amen.

 

[CFLarsen]

Guns don't kill people, terrorists kill people.

Guns just make it a hell of a lot easier.

Oh, humbug. You cannot tell the story of the German Autumn without telling tons of stories, ranging from the PLO, PFLP, the Japanese Red Army, CIA, USA, and Claus Larsen.

OK, I made that last one up. But **** that. We would be here for eternity if we're going to tell the stories in full. And Chaos' point is very much there; whether we discuss the Berufsverbot and also the argument on profiling at the time (why DID you leave that one out? VERY remiss of you), it makes no difference at all to Chaos' point.

That's exactly Chaos' point: That harsh measures do not contribute to end the threat.

When you start banning people from holding certain jobs merely for having opinions that differ from your own, you have started a slippery-slope.

* That was the reason for the Berufsverbot, CFLarsen, and while that may on the surface sound ridiculous and was far from perfectly fair, i think Brandt and Schmidt handeled the "German Autumn" all in all very professional without unnecessary alarmism.

Don't forget Martin Niemöller:

In Germany, they came first for the Communists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist;

And then they came for the trade unionists, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist;

And then they came for the Jews, And I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew;

And then . . . they came for me . . . And by that time there was no one left to speak up."

 

[Childlike Empress]

Don't forget Martin Niemöller:

You should re-post that in the "Tasering Political Opinion" thread. Seems like some people really need a reminder.