Elections in Romania

Romania is caught in the troubled and complex chess game between NATO and Russia. Along with Poland, it plays a key strategic and logistical role in fueling the ongoing war. Both Romania and Poland share a long border with Ukraine. Romania is not far from Odessa, as it is als lies along the coast of the Black Sea. It is home to major US bases, and a large NATO base is being built on its territory. This new base will serve as a major airport and dispatch for weapons being sent to the war in Ukraine. Romania is deeply integrated into the NATO military complex. Even in an electoral regime, it is clear that any outcome that might slightly weaken the unity of the governmental front aligned with Western Europe would not tolerated by the Western apparatus.

This creates a twofold deception for the proletariat. First, the European and American media drum up fear of a fascist threat. Then, Romanian “voters” are led to believe they play an essential role in determining “their” country’s future.

After the first round of the Nov. 24 presidential election, a “surprise” candidate belonging to an “ultranationalist” current won a large margin of the votes. In contrast, the traditional parliamentary parties performed poorly, as did the social democratic and “neoliberal” candidates (whatever this term means in the eyes of bourgeois ideologues). This candidate, Călin Georgescu, has often been described by the national and international press as a pro-Russian fascist. As a result of his electoral victory, “pro-democracy” and “anti-fascist” student protests began to take to the streets in major Romanian cities, such as Bucharest, Cluj-Napoca, and Timișoara. These demonstrations contested the results with confusing anti-fascist and anti-Russian slogans. The usual grand theatrics in defense of endangered democracy, which lacks any consideration for the objective needs of the working class.

The main points of attack from the bourgeois left have focused on Geogescu’s previous political statements. He has praised Legionnaire leaders Corneliu Zelea-Cordeanu and Ion Antonescu as “national heroes who gave their lives for the country.” He has also been criticized for being pro-Russian and calling Vladimir Putin a “true leader.” This is considered dangerous for an EU and NATO member, as it endangers the interests of Western capital.

The “left” petty bourgeoisie has become hysterical about this election. They say the rise of so-called “extremist” parties will lead to a fascist regime, which will strip away democratic rights—much like what occurred in 1937 with the government of Octavian Goga and Alexandru Cuza.

Of course, Călin Georgescu’s program is so absurd that no capitalist could support it, at least in this form. He says nothing about the attitude toward capitalist enterprises, but indulges in incoherent petty-bourgeois babble about how “the development of small and medium property consolidates the feeling of community, freedom and equality, since it offers the citizen the possibility of becoming an owner-producer, that is, a person with dignity and freedom […] Only small and medium property brings back the freedom and honor of labor.”

Waving the bogeyman of fascism to try to stop the anti-democratic drift is simple mystification. It simultaneously manages to reinforce the loyalties of the petty bourgeoisie and fulfills the need for the Western military alliance to have free rein (in order to reaffirm its policies). It would also be a direct message to the potential new president not to dare to follow in the footsteps of other challengers of the NATO military system, in the style of Orbán. One Orbán is enough.

It is precisely under this lens that the Romanian Constitutional Court’s stance should be evaluated. In the Dec. 6 decision, the Court annulled the results of the first round of the presidential election due to “Russian interference.” The decision was justified by alleging that the Romanian Secret Service discovered that Călin Georgescu had received material support from the Russian government to increase his popularity in the election campaign. The court then ruled that the electoral machine will have to start all over again, with a new campaign, and the same old round of empty promises from the bourgeois contenders.

One thing is for sure: this decision reaffirms that the Balkan nation remains an important ally for NATO’s imperialist plans, and that domestic and foreign interests in Romania remain closely intertwined with and dependent on those of Western capital. On the other hand, Russian interference should not be overlooked. This possible interference would only be a sign of intensifying global tensions among the imperialist powers. Unsurprisingly, the U.S. State Department had openly expressed its displeasure with the handling of the elections to Romanian authorities. “Fascism as anti-democracy” is a specious, false argument.

Laws banning abortion, draconian measures to cover budget deficits by cutting workers’ wages, banning all forms of classist propaganda, can as easily be enacted under the more “democratic” republic as fascism. The Federal Republic of Germany already has constitutional powers to deny or revoke citizenship from individuals it considers undesirable or not “assimilated.” Abortion is outlawed in many U.S. states. The Romanian constitution prohibits “class hatred,” making it illegal for a communist party to operate. Considering the terror and police surveillance which participants in “pro-Palestinian” protests are subjected in all the democratic countries of Europe, it is safe to assume that the authorities will multiply their abuses a hundredfold when faced with a threat from a revolutionary workers’ movement.

What we see today, coming from both so-called “leftists” and pro-laissez faire “neoliberal” circles, is the same disgusting “democratic” propaganda that has poisoned the proletariat for over a century. Voting is seen as the highest level of political activism that can be achieved. Once every four years, they all turn into “great political activists,” and claim to decide their future by voting. They then proceed to fall asleep for another four years. They are then either exploited as workers or crushed under the weight of capitalist competition as petty-bourgeois. There is no talk of classes. Voters do not constitute any class, but are a mass of “independent, equal” people imbued with rationality and “free will”.

The worker and the capitalist seem to be on the same legal plane, as mere “persons” with a consciousness that is independent of their class situation, the material conditions of their existence. Choosing a party is a technical question, not a political one. It becomes a question of which party gives them the most benefits, or which one is the “lesser evil” among them. Anyone who has a different opinion and gives their vote to another party is seen as an “irrational” and ignorant individual (as all of Călin Georgescu’s voters are now considered).

And of course, this idea of fairness, of rational decision is also taken out of its social context, as if there is such a thing as eternal justice or abstract social truth. Our party will never tire of proclaiming that there is no truth except class truth. What is “right” for the bourgeoisie will never be “right” for the proletariat.

At this historical stage, the generalized crisis of the capitalist mode of production and the ensuing clash between imperialisms bring the outcome of the war between states closer. Stirring up the mud of democratic elections to decide the fate of the “nation” is a vile and well-known treason against the proletarian class. The proletariat, led by its revolutionary party, is the only force capable of stopping the inhumane massacre of World War III.