Anti-Deutsche Antifa

Can you elaborate?

Devrim

Alternatively it could be an expression of hostility to someone making a sweeping assertion about anti-semitism on the "anglophone left" and then not offering any evidence to back it up. A hostility grounded in an experience, shared by many Palestinian rights activists, of such sweeping assertions being used by pro-Israel or pro-war commentators to silence or delegitimise the left.

I'm certainly not incredulous at the idea that forms of anti-semitism can be found amongst sections of the broadly defined "left", by the way.

Its not bait. Please give me some examples of anti-semitism by anglaphone left groups.

And thank, i enjoy my affectations deeply.

I maintain a veto on what i consider left group, but i genuinely can't think of any left group of any persuasion that is anti-semitic.

There are loads which are rabidly anti-israeli beyond all reason however; this is why i think that, if you are conflating the 2 things, you may be at liberty to lick my crack. Perhaps not.

By the way, can someone tell me why there are groups and individuals that campaign against 'racism and anti-semtism'?
Isn't that like saying 'violence and hitting people'?

PS - if the labour party is counted as left group, you are right - they are very anti-semitic, i apologise.

Through the Labour Friends of Israel and support for the US middle east policy of backing Israel without restriction they have demonstrated extreme prejudice against the semitic people's of the region.

Are there any updates on this group?

I find it rather alarming, a group that opposes German nationalism but fully supports Israeli nationalism?

Are all German antifa groups pro-Israel? I am shocked if this is so, I never realised the antifa movement in Germany had a rightwing element.

Chanting things like 'Bomber Harris do it again'. They seem to identify with rightwing politics.

This video is a digrace: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qTm9WJRTBxc

Why don't they just march with the NPD? They both have the same goals, an Israel without non-Jews and a Germany without non-Germans.

No, antifa in Germany are loosely split between anti-deutsch (anti-german) and anti-imp (anti-imperialist - anarchists, autonomists etc).

And anti-deutsch aren't really a group - there's lots of political differences between them (for instance, some support US foreign policy as they are Israel's main backer, while others don't) - more of a collection of groups, networks etc based around a certain politic and certain newspapers/magazines.

The thread wasn't "on the old site" but on page three of this site:

Umm, the NPD doesn't really have that goal. Quite the opposite, really. They march wearing Palestinian scarves and proclaim their militant opposition to Zionism.

Che Guevara t-shirts are also a popular fashion accessory with the Nazis for a few years now. Perhaps your thinking is too muddled and mired in foggy notions of "left-wing" and "right-wing", which renders you incapable of formulating a critique of nationalism from a communist perspective.

A communist critique would involve understanding why certain "leftist" positions are so readily appropriated by the "right".

Uhh...No. Antifa in the 1990s was sort of a political tendency in and of itself, distinct from both the classical Autonomist movement and other leftist trends like Anarchism. It was characterized by a high degree of superficiality, half-ironically taking Third Period KPD Stalinism as a point of reference, but without really getting bogged down in the finer points of dogma. It was also accused of lowest common denominator agitation, hooligan posing, and a cosmetic aspect exemplified by the wearing of trendy brand name clothing like Carhartt and New Balance sneakers (the term "Pop Antifa" comes from this period).

This was miles away from traditional "1980s" Autonomism, which was born of a completely different political context in a still-divided Germany. (Antifa was definitely a post-reunification political phenomenon, a completely different generation than the Autonomists)

Anarchists (Wildcat, the FAU) were *always* sharply critical of the Antifa movement for a variety of reasons.

And your use of the phrase "Anti-Imp" is also unnecessarily confusing, since that actually tends to refer to 1970s armed struggle groups like the RAF and their above ground supporters.

With the collapse of the AA/BO (Antifascist Action, Federal Organization) around the turn of the millenium, as well as a turn by the German state towards greater opposition to Neo-Nazi movements, the Antifa movement found itself in a crisis of orientation. The magazine project Phase 2 <http://www.phase-zwei.org> was intended as a regroupment organ for the groups coming out of the AA/BO (eventually the BgR Leipzig would assert its hegemony in the editorial board).

At around this time, during this period of reflection, certain Anti-German theoretical elements seeped into Antifa discourse, though again, in the 90s, Anti-German is mainly a publicistic discourse, and one which refers to a wide variety of theoretical positions, many of which would reject the label today because of what it has come to mean (I am thinking here of the Post-Structuralist types around Guenther Jacob and the now defunct journal 17 Grad). Anti-German was not necessarily a synonym for Antifa, though as Antifa activists got older, entered university, graduated university, etc., they of course read the occasional issue of Bahamas, maybe books by the likes of Robert Kurz, had a subscription to a newspaper like Jungle World, etc.

Antifa as a real movement and a distinct political tendency really is moribund, though "anti-fascist activism" in terms of anti-Nazi protests and such still exists. One of the leading Antifa groups of the 90s, the Antifaschistische Aktion Berlin, splintered into two groups, the Antifaschistische Linke Berlin, and Kritik und Praxis Berlin. The latter itself split in two and those halves are now organized in Theorie.Organization.Praxis <http://www.top-berlin.net> and Gruppe Soziale Kämpfe <http://gskb.wordpress.com/>

At the time, because it happened simultaneous with the Iraq war, many outsiders tried to characterize the AAB split as along Anti-German/Non-Anti-German lines, but the protagonists of the split themselves say otherwise, and you can find individuals in both organizations who support one or the other position, or neither.

If I wanted to be glib, I would say the AAB split was more between street-fighting, hooligan numskulls on the one hand and wanky, university-seminar intellectuals on the other.

The latter is what I was referring to when I said antifa (hence the lower case "a"). What I said comes from friends (both German and ex-pat NZ'ers living in Germany) who are involved in antifa activism in Germany, mostly anarchists/autonomists but a couple are anti-deutsch.

Just out of curiosity, do your friends actually self-identify as Autonomists?

I only ask because here in Berlin, nobody in my political circles under the age of 40+ uses the term as a self-description. Anyone who was 20 years old at the peak of the Autonomen in 1981 would be about 46 or 47 today, and anyone who was 20 years old during the second wave, say during the IMF/World Bank protests in 1987, would be about 40.

The mainstream media, right-wing tabloids like the Bild, tend to use "autonomist" as a catch-all term for the militant extra-parliamentary left, but within the left itself, it usually refers to a distinct moment in time which is now long past. If one wants to be melodramatic, then the "reunification" marks a definite end to that period of history, but less dramatically, just the normal run of capitalist development and the neo-liberalization of conditions has put an end to the possibilities that once existed.

Ironically, the existence of such a declared anti-statist political tendency had as its precondition the existence of a Fordist welfare state which genuinely allowed one the option of refusing fixed employment and a "9-to-5" existence.

It's strange, a lot of the "1990s" generation who cut their teeth on Antifa politics, and who distinguished themselves from the "Altautonomen", are themselves the old farts within the scene. And now "Generation Seattle/Generation Genoa" isn't exactly young anymore either. Some people on demos today were barely conscious when Seattle and Genoa happened. :-0

Well I know people from Berlin that describe themselves as being "Autonome" and there are a lot more in the rest of the country. Some of them even are 40-

The meaning of "anti-imp" in Germany somewhat shifted within the past two decades. In the seventieth and eighties "Anti-Imp" was mainly the self-description for those who supported the RAF, mostly thirdworldist with a leninist ideological background (if any). As opposed to the "Autonomen", many of the latter claiming to be anarchist. Nowadys "anti-imps" have little to do with those of the 80th. They are even more authoritarian now (leninists, maoists, stalinists) and they share the nutty ideology that every "anti-imperialist" government (Iran, Venezuela, Bolivia, China, Zimbabwe) and every national "liberation" movement must be defended and is their potential ally.

One does, yes. And he's based in Berlin, and well under 40.

It makes sense to me now why the many moderate-left Germans I have met are very critical of the antifa movement. Whether the Anti-Deutsche Antifa are part of the antifa movement or not, a saying comes to mind 'there is no left or right when you are an extremist'.

Germans should not have to feel guilty for the holocaust, but should acknowledge it and move on. If anyone has this belief that somehow Germans are uniquely 'anti-semitic' I think that is highly debateable. I feel as though when a radical group claims to be anti-German and hates the state in general this can only lead to more people leaning towards the right in Germany. This seems similar to the situation in Australia, where some on the left have argued or have been accused of arguing that non-Indigenous Australians should feel 'guilty' for the bad treatment of Aboriginal Australians. Something I totally disagree with, it's not about feeling guilty its about acknowledging the mistakes of the past and moving forward in unison to overcome the issues facing our great Indigenous people. When you have Australians feeling as though they should feel 'guilty', this is when you have people turning towards voting for the right, and winning sympathy from John Howard or Wilson Tuckey. I could see this happening in Germany, we're people want to feel proud of being German but cant identify with the left because they believe its 'pro-feeling guilty' rather then moving progressively into the future. Annoying any German you meet by calling them a ‘nazi’ or asking them if they hate ‘jews’, just because they are Germans, can only lead to sympathy with the NPD or any other neo-nazi groups in Germany.

Anyhow, a group is allowed to be pro-Israel or anti-communist, but surely can't be described as being leftwing. I agree with many Israel-Palestine progressives when they say that a true friend of Israel is one that constructively criticises it. I firmly believe in a peaceful solution in Israel-Palestine can be achieved once the issues of land, refugees, discrimination etc.. are dealt with in a fair and progressive way. When you have a highly aggressive military nation fighting a minority that believes in suicide bombings, with innocent people caught up on either side, the conflict will never end without legitimate talks.
The AD Antifa are obviously not legitimate supporters of Israel regardless.

It is a worry to hear the NPD act as friends of the Arab nations or the Palestinian people, I think the NPD as a good a friend to the Arab nations or the Palestinians as the AD Antifa are to Israel.

Shalom. Salaam. Peace…

To me this sounds like bourgeois "anti-totalitarianism" theory, where political substance is irrelevant and what counts is the threat to democracy posed by "extremists".

Nobody says they should, not even the Anti-Germans.

I think the question for most ADs is why anti-semitism took the specific eliminatory form that it did. None of the tendencies I am familiar with would claim anti-semitism is a genetically hardwired characteristic among Germans.

Huh? You find it a problem if people critique the state? Why are you on libcom?

Oh yeah, that's why people become Nazis, they've all been victimized by the left.

You're talking as if it's somehow a positive thing to be a friend of Israel. Israel is a nation-state and a tool of the local ruling class, I'm not a friend of it and I live there.

Yeah. And I'm sure that the cat problem can be dealt with as soon as someone puts a bell around his neck.

When it is in the interest of the Israeli ruling class that a strict ethnic differential remain in place in order to safeguard themselves against their class enemies, they will push militarism as far as they can get away with. They will go into talks when they feel they have something to gain from it.

Legitimate to whom? They're assuredly an irrelevant supporter of Israel, I doubt they're responsible for any significant portion of the national budget.

I have no problem with people criticising the state, I just disagree with cynical and non-constructive criticism of a country. I view the AD Antifa's views as extremely radical, I don't believe they have a good argument against a unified Germany. This stems from the fact that they openly supported the acts of the British bombing of civilian homes in Dresden during World War Two, by shouting ''Bomber Harris do it again'' at rallies. How can anyone attempt to understand them when they support an action as any during the Holocaust. To me they are just a radical group that cannot dare be referred to as 'leftwing', 'anarchist' or even an 'antifa' group. I find it hard to see criticism without seeing an alternative. If you have criticism thats fine, but offer an alternative plan/option/policy.
Why am I on libcom? I'm not so sure now, my politics are more about holding leftwing progressive views and being highly optimistic. Does this make me fit for being on libcom? I sometimes feel as though on the left, there is too little progressive/optimistic discussion and more cynical/negative discussion that leads to people voting for the right.

When you have elements on the left that do victimise people, I can't see why people won't sympathise with nazis or even become one. I'm not saying all people will, but I have seen this happen in Australia through the history of our Indigenous people. Many Australians have to be reinformed that it's about acknowledging the historical bad treatment of our Indigenous people and not about feeling guilty. I'm not saying the left is entirely responsible for people feeling this way, but I do feel as though there are some on the left in Australia that add to this problem.

Am I making sense? If not say something and I will try and re-clarify again.

There are many good arguments to be against the unification. The most fundamental is communist opposition to the nation, period. This isn't "Anti-German", it is Communism 101.

You can't "support" something you weren't alive to participate it.

"Bomber Harris do it again" is fun to shout at demos, especially in the face of the disgusting German cult of victimhood concerning the bombing of Dresden.

Another great one is "Stalingrad, Stalingrad – jede Sekunde ein Deutscher Soldat!"

Is there a verb or noun missing in this sentence, or are you actually comparing the bombing of Dresden with the Holocaust?

So you have a personal moral code according to which you make judgments concerning who gets to have these illustrious labels applied to them. I assume you obtain some comfort from that.

Nah, "recipes for the cookshops of the future" aren't my thing. I much prefer "ruthless criticism of everything existing."

Huh?

Que? Is there one? The terror bombing of Europe (and Japan) by the Allies do constitute war crimes, something even Robert McNamara (one of the number crunchers behind it) in Fog of War concedes. IMO an atrocity is an atrocity no matter what, one is not worse than the other and nothing is an ultimate evil or unprecedented in human history.

Oh yes. During GDR times, the bombing of Dresden was primarily used as a propaganda instrument against "allied terror", but since the reunification it has assumed its proper place in the pantheon of crimes against the German nation.

Legalistic categories like "crimes" and "rights" are strange things for anti-statists to make use of. No doubt there are atrocities in any war, but I don't think anarchists or communists should be in the business of defining things as "crimes" or "rights", both of which are defined by sovereign powers.

This is a relativization of the Holocaust. What distinguishes the Holocaust from, say, the genocide committed against Native Americans, was that it did not follow any logic of capitalist valorization or a statist territorial logic. Jews were exterminated for being Jews, and valuable, necessary resources were diverted from the war effort simply in order to exterminate Jews.

This would be, I think, one point where the ADs are correct in their critique of the traditional left, which sees the Shoah simply as a quantitatively brutal crime in history, but not qualitatively singular.

Ok, but in what way is this different from any other state?

Point taken. Nevertheless it was an atrocity. Do you agree that it was?

History is replete with similar genocides. Creation of states and nations (particularly in Europe) have always entailed massacres and genocide by various ethnic groups, though most of those are forgotten and I would wager is completely eradicated from history. What is different with regards to the holocaust perpetrated by nazis was that it happened in relatively modern times and was done with modern means of rational killing. The Rwandan genocide is very similar, and although it wasn't industrial or "modern" is was still very much rational and resources in this case was also diverted away from fighting the civil war and the war against guerilla forces based in neighbouring countries.

This is where your critique completely falls flat. The case with the Jewish Holocaust is that it is identified as being singularly the most horrible atrocity in human history, it is the converse of your argument. And I do find it pretty offensive that you imply that I am only seeking quantitative parity when what I am in fact looking for is qualitative recognition of other (singluar) atrocities. I find it shocking that you will afford the Shoah (even using the Hebrew term for it, which implcitly doesn't recognize that other people were murdered) special qualitative treatment while ignoring other atrocities.

The point is not to fucking get parity or something, but to recognize that all of these atrocities are that. You seem unable to do that and go full circle.

Are you pulling me up because I didn't use the right word to describe the fact that they do support the actions of 'Bomber Harris'? Would you have preferred that I said that they 'celebrate' the actions of 'Bomber Harris' instead? Is that better?

You think its 'fun' to shout 'Bomber Harris do it again' at demos? How is this different from neo-nazis shouting 'seig heil' or giving the fascist salute on the opposing side..?
So there's a justification for slaughtering innocent civilians, if other innocent civilians are being slaughtered?

I am not comparing the Holocaust with the bombing of Dresden, but do not wish to rank atrocity by order of suffering. They were both atrocities where innocent human beings suffered. It is unwise to say that 'this atrocity would have been better to have been in then that one'. Human suffering is human suffering, there is no comparison between atrocities, its the same result at the end of the day. Innocent people have perished. Many atrocities occurred during World War Two, at the hands of Germans, Japanese, Britons and Americans. There is no point ranking which atrocity might have been worse or better.. its important to denounce all of them.

If you cannot admit that 'an atrocity is an atrocity' then maybe I could ask you why you are on libcom.?

If someone thinks it's 'fun' to celebrate an atrocity no matter who was the victim, then I can't see an end to genocide and human suffering in the future.

How is what different from any other state? (I'm not being contentious, I'm honestly not sure what you're asking)

Wolfgang Pohrt once said in an entirely different context that it's "always deplorable when people don't die a natural death, peacefully in bed after a fulfilling life and surrounded by friends and relatives. But there would be no time left to breath if one did not refrain from sorrow as a rule".

I have no problem with people grieving quietly concerning loved ones and family members lost during the bombing of Dresden. The same goes for people who lost loved ones during September 11th, 2001. But in both cases, *public* commemoration serves a political function, and it is the espoused "non-political" intent of such public commemoration that makes it so much more insidious.

No, history is replete with genocides. None of them are "similar" to the Holocaust.

I never said "most horrible", and I generally don't engage in "rankings" of atrocities, so don't put words in my mouth. I am arguing for the *singularity* of the Holocaust. If you think arguing for the uniqueness of the Holocaust is tantamount to asking for some sort of special privilege for Jews, you have other issues that I won't even bother to correct.

Leftist = Nazis?

Nevermind, you're a troll. I won't be responding to your posts from here on. 'Bye.

Can't say I'm surprised that this is the way this discussion has ended up, you have avoided the arguments against you and have resorted to name-calling. I can't see how your radical views won't lead you into joining a neo-nazi group someday. Arguing for '*singularity* of the Holocaust' is foolish and adds to the racist claim that 'Jews are some how entirely different from every other human being on the planet'. We mustn’t forget that the Holocaust claimed many different groups, and was not solely out of hate for Jews and Jews only. Jews were seen as inferior, in the same way Blacks were seen as inferior, mentally retarded people and Homosexuals were seen as inferior……. We are all the same people, we all have suffered tragedy and loss, as I said there's no point in claiming that this genocide was worse or better then that one. Human suffering must stop, and that must come from all groups regardless of whether they're claiming to be or are termed as the ‘goodies’ or the ‘badies’.

Claiming that somehow I am being ‘anti-Semitic’ is laughable, seeing as though my arguments are based around debunking your views that add to traditional anti-Jewish hatred.

In the sense that all nation-states uses events like this for bringing the nation together. Like the Shoah for Israel, the German invasion of Norway in Norway, 9/11 in the States etc. etc.

Couldn't agree more, and that was my point with my "how is this different from any other state" comment. It is in fact often used to legitimize violence against "others" quite effectively. I mean even in the pantheon of anarchism we have these things: the Krohnstadt rebellion, the Spanish Civil War and so on.

Well, sorry if I put words in you mouth, but you were engaging in the same in the above. When it is not spelt out properly I have to assume things. That you are the danger of ending full circle in you argument I think is still valid.

Of course every genocide is unique. Any event regardless of being comedy, tragedy or farce is unique. However, when you look at the reasons for why genocides are carried out (be it against a "race", ethnicity, enemies of the class or whatever) they do share common traits in the sense that they are all part and parcel of "cleansing" society and building the perfect state. In that sense there is nothing different between the genocidal state-making around the time of the peace of Westphalia, the Rwandan genocide, the Shoah or the butchering by the Khmer Rouge.

How is a chant of 'Bomber Harris do it again' different from 'Victory to the Taliban'?

Khawaga, I don't think we really disagree on much, except on the particularity of the Holocaust, and there I maintain that the elimination of the Jews followed a logic that is not compatible, with say, the expansionist territorial logic motivating the elimination of the native American population by white settlers. However, I have to dig around in my library for supporting arguments...

OliverTwister,

The "Bomber Harris" chant was originally a humorous provocation, not a programmatic political point. Anti-Imperialists shouting "Victory to the Taliban" presumably mean that, even if there is also an element of provocation involved.

who chanted 'victory to the taliban'?

I would agree that the extermination of Jews was illogical with regards to Nazi Germany's expansionist aims, but not if the extermination is simply seen as good old fashioned state building or, to a lesser extent, when viewed in terms of nazi goals and aims. For the very same reason I am not entirely convinced that the holocaust was down to the Nazis being 'irrational'.

This myspace link has a group with an Israel flag inside the Antifa logo.

Worth a look.