From Romania, With Love. The Future Of A Country

They're talkin' 'bout a revolution

Throughout history, few were the events that had ignited so much passion like revolutions did. One of those looser words, as Crane Brintons calls it, Revolution - either the word or the concept - can be so many things at a time. On the one hand, we have the Russian Revolution, while on the other we have the Industrial Revolution. On the one hand, we have the Arab Spring, while on the other we have the global revolution(s). On the one hand, we have Marxs Revolution seen as locomotives of history. On the other, we have Roosevelts toned down voice: a revolution is sometimes necessary, but if revolutions become habitual the country in which they take place is going down-hill.

Yet, despite the many declinations of the word, there is a clear distinction between a revolution and social unrest. As it is between a revolutionary situation and a revolutionary outcome. A revolution can include a lot of social unrest, while social unrest does not necessarily lead to the making of a revolution. In the same logic, a revolutionary situation does not compulsory lead to revolutionary outcomes. Likewise, revolutionary outcomes are not always the end result of a revolutionary situation.

Generally speaking, we genuinely tend to overlook these distinctions.

The thin red line which sets out a revolution from social unrest is drawn by the consistency and the constancy of contention. The ability and the disponibility of the contenders to negotiate their way among the ruling elite is what makes the difference.

Indeed, passion can ignite upheavals and support contention. But only when protest is converted into judicious argumentation and implementation one is able to speak about the reformation of all social and political institutions.

Promise for benefit not received in detriment of the people

Romanias very recent social and political unrest has made headlines as the strongest and boldest social upheaval occurring in Eastern Europe since 1989.

Massive Protests Stop Romanian Law That Would Have Eased Corruption Penalties (Time Magazine). Romania Protests Simmer Despite Leaders' Promises to Back Down (New York Times). How Romania is developing its culture of protest (Euronews). Romania's gift of hope to the world (AlJazeera). These are only some of the titles describing the event.

Civic education and democratic practices need time to get fully integrated. Likewise, the performance of governmental institutions and agencies is a by product of good governance, accountability, transparency and trust.

Romania's recent history has been an anthology of makings and breaking of the Social Contract. Promise for benefit not received in detriment of the people.

Over the years, the worthwhile goals of political stability and economic development of the Romanian government have been shattered by the lack of accountability on the part of corrupt public officials and the lack of trust on the part of citizens about government actions. The countrys administrative, educational, healthcare and judicial systems went from poor to flat broke.

In pure theoretical terms, the countrys economy did pretty well. But the Romanian citizens are hardly competitive with their European fellows. Despite being a member state of the European Union, large parts of the country are still struggling with lack of decent infrastructure and poverty.

Slowly, disappointment grew into frustration. Then, frustration grew into anger. Till it all broke down.

The patience of Romanian citizens hit the ground when the newly elected social-democratic government, ruled by the controversial Liviu Dragnea, hastily adopted a decree that would have eased penalties for official corruption. The secrecy - or rather the scarce communication, to quote the PMs official stance - put fuel on fire.

It was a matter of hours until the streets of Bucharest filled with hundreds of thousands of protesters. Many other cities followed. The February 2017 protests grew into the most solid social movement recorded since the 1989 fall of the Communist Regime. Beyond question. Men and women of all ages cried against corruption and blamed the longstanding arrogance of the leading officials.

From a revolutionary situation to revolutionary outcomes

The protest achieved its initial aim: the controversial decree has been withdrawn.

But was that all? The feelings are mixed. Some of the protesters pledge for backing down and allowing the government to rule under the principles of representative democracy. Some others claim the demands should be stretched, calling for the resignation of PM Grindeanu.

It's really hard to come up with a clear answer on this issue, believes Vlad Stoicescu, founding editor of Dela0.ro , a Bucharest-based independent online magazine. On one hand, the outcome of the elections is still fresh, with PM Grindeanu just recently invested. Over three million people voted for the SPD in December 2016 and there are certain signs that snap elections would be seen as a way to overturn the will of those voters, says Stoicescu, who works with a team of six people at Dela0.ro to cover under-reported stories and provide factual narratives to ongoing Romanian systemic failures. On the other hand, you have a Justice minister that lied in order to pass the decree. Under a freedom of information request, the written records of the cabinet meeting that approved the decree have been made public. And they show how the minister assures of complying with all necessary procedures, when in fact total secrecy surrounded the legal process. This fosters a legitimate concern that the government cannot be trusted anymore, believes Stoicescu.

In his speech held in front of the Parliament, Romanias president, Klaus Iohannis, backed the government to remain in power. You have been saying in public that I would like to overthrow the legitimate government, said he. That is false. You won, now you govern and legislate, but not at any price.

The situation is, nonetheless, knotty. And the manner in which the entanglement is going to be tackled both on social and political grounds will make the difference for the future, consolidating a revolutionary situation into a revolutionary outcome.

Addressing the future

How are the Social-Democrats going to regain trust? The SDP sits on a very comfortable Parliamentary majority, but the Cabinets credibility is ruined. Up till now, few declarations have been made. Mr. Dragnea, the Partys leader, has virtually no leverage left. Meanwhile, none of his protgs has either the capacity or the power to take over.

The left side of the political spectrum calls for leadership. Yet, change can be challenging and finding the momentum requires good strategy.

Liviu Dragnea is still very powerful in his party because he has the capacity to carry a carrot and stick policy, believes Diana Oncioiu, one of the journalists who works at Dela0.ro . Diana was a political journalist for Realitatea TV and Digi 24, two of the biggest TV news stations in Romania, but she quit in 2014 to pick up the challenge of working as a reporter for Dela0.ro . She has seen Liviu Dragnea over the years, evolving from a local leader to president of the SDP, the country's biggest political party. He's a clever administrator, he coordinated several election campaigns and he established a power network inside his party that makes it very hard to contest his authority. Dragnea knows the party's base and he made sure he has the means to give or take money away from local mayors and councils. And they all depend on those money to build roads, schools, hospitals. It's really difficult to be critical in such circumstances, also knowing that the SPD, with him at the helm, took 45% of the national vote in December, explains Oncioiu. As a conclusion, she sees few chances of a near-future reform.

What should the opposition do? Well, before anything else, it should exist. Politically speaking, the current opposition is made out of bits and pieces of different split factions, with very thin majorities and faint ideologies.

Mr. Klaus Iohannis is the only one who seems to be capitalizing from the whole jumble. Some would even say he is winning a battle he didnt even fight.

It certainly came as an unexpected chance to take a stand and simultaneously be on the right side, but also gain politically from the situation, thinks Vlad Stoicescu. Klaus Iohannis already has in sight the 2019 presidential elections, so he obviously tries to position himself as an anti-corruption fighter that opposes the interests of the SDP. He clearly tries to make an enemy out of them and it works. Because those that took to the streets strongly believe the decree was intended to help certain SPD figures that are under investigation for corruption, tells Stoicescu. But there is also another narrative, backed up by the results of the December elections, he thinks: that the president is trying to get rid of the SDP cabinet and that he doesn't act as a mediator. Because of the extremely biased mainstream media in Romania, this narrative risks to turn the discussion away from what actually happened - the government trying to pass a controversial decree by ignoring all democratic norms - to all sort of alternative explanations, half-truths and so on.

Of equal importance, we have a set of questions that are to be addressed from a rather social perspective. And they all imply the breeding of critical thinking and the independence of judgement. The criteria upon which we, the people, make decisions. And last but not least, the manner in which we should use this moment to learn some of the hidden truths about the tyranny of the majority.

Hundreds of thousands of people protesting in the streets against a governmental decree that was passed against all democratic procedures is a beautiful thing. I mean it's like a beacon of light in the middle of darkness. But there's also a danger to it, indicates Diana Oncioiu. Being surrounded by 250.000 people (the estimated participation at last Sundays Bucharest protest in Victory Square) can also be deceiving, because you start thinking that everyone in Romania feels and thinks like you. And it's really not the case, because Romanian society is really fractured along social lines. Poverty has the effect of making a lot of people, especially in rural areas, immune to anti-corruption drives. They want a better life and they're willing to vote for someone that provides such a promise even if that someone abuses his or her position of power, thinks Diana.

The team of journalists working at Dela0.ro firmly believe that the solutions are to be found within a long-term commitment to democratic values and participation. The street protests have just marked a start. For a long time we had this stereotype image of the SDP voter: poor, old, uneducated, lazy people waiting for money from the welfare state. We despised and marginalised them, blaming them for giving the power to the social democrats through their vote. But it was not only the politician who divided us. We also did it, the society as a whole. So maybe after these protests we can begin a dialogue. Leaving the bubble, as it was often required in these past weeks, doesnt have to mean only to get out of your apartment and protest. It might also mean to get out of your comfort zone, one populated by people who think like you and live like you.

***

You can follow Diana Oncioiu, Vlad Stoicescu, their stories and investigations on dela0.ro