why do some romanians still admire this communist dictator?what bad things did he do that i can use as arguments to refute them,since not much is known about him besides communist propaganda?

satanama666 said:

why do some romanians still admire this communist dictator?what bad things did he do that i can use as arguments to refute them,since not much is known about him besides communist propaganda?

Click to expand...

Some fools say it was better during communism only because it was replaced by Jewish democracy.
For the rest, I only know that life was lousy and for a family you only had a certain amount of food per week (very little).
While the head of state had gold taps.
The conclusion that communism was better comes from a low understanding of the situation and essentially from people who have given up and have no desire to see a better world because they are lazy.

satanama666 said:

why do some romanians still admire this communist dictator?what bad things did he do that i can use as arguments to refute them,since not much is known about him besides communist propaganda?

Click to expand...

The truth is that at the moment Romania is in a worse situation than it was under Ceausescu...
The current leadership are literally puppets who want to establish a totalitarian/authoritarian regime where democracy is totally ignored. In a way they are right with that statement, but don't forget COMMUNISM HAS NEVER DELIVERED ANY GOOD THING.

satanama666 said:

why do some romanians still admire this communist dictator?what bad things did he do that i can use as arguments to refute them,since not much is known about him besides communist propaganda?

Click to expand...

Note that I will only express my personal views on this based on what I read and what I spoke with other people, and I am aware that there might be people here who have way more accurate and realistic information than I have.

I don't know if you are Romanian but the reality is, this regime had both advantages and disadvantages, good in some ways but negative in other ways.

For once, his regime was more of a cult of personality than jewish communism. He wanted the country to be independent from any external pressure and influence, which he eventually did. He reffered to his system more as socialism than communism. The leader before him was a jewish bolshevik but he was a gentile who tried to create a country as powerful and independent as possible. And around here lies the advantages:

- the education system war far better then than now. You must to have been a genius to become a doctor or manager or similar career. Nowadays if you have enough money you can buy university degrees, maters and PhDs without studying anything, and also be given power positions in different companies if you have friends in politics. This corruption was not neccesarily unexistent in communist times but was far lower comparing to now.

- science and research were far more developed then than now. A couple tnteresting things that I can note here is that Communist Romania was among very few countries in the world to have a centre that was researching the communication with dolphins and also training them for millitary missions (that's not neccesarily a good thing but is something most countries did not have and still don't). Another one is Communist Romania had the biggest Dream Research Institute in the world. Also regarding the mind, it is said that in the `80s, Romania was a top country in telepathy research, surpassed only by 4 or 5 nations, 2 of which of course were the global powers (US and USSR)

- the army was far more powerful and better organized then than now. In fact, most of the Romanian millitary technology was either destroyed, either sold for nothing (the Navy for example, sold by the former jewish president probably for a good bribe). Also, it was probably a top 5 army in Euope, probably this is the reason US and USSR decided to engineer a coup instead of doing what they did in Yugoslavia (which was a very similar country by the way), because in a war against Romania they would have obviously won as they were the global millitary powers but probably with considerable casualties because the Romanian army was well organized and had at the time equipment and artillery that could easily compete with any other country in Europe, For example they used to have both sovietic MIGs and also Romanian own aircraft which was considered to be at least at the same level. Now Romania is forced to import third hand 40 years old F-16 from US, which is probably trash compared to what they used to have

- the economy and industry were far more developed and competent then than now. The country was importing little and exporting everything, this is how Romania was the only country in the history to fully pay their external debt, which as far as I remember was $20 billion at the time. The vast majority of the industrly was either completely destroyed by corrupted directors after 1989 to enrich themselves, either sold for nearly free to western corporations for big bribes to politicians, corporations which accaparated the entire Romanian economy. Even in the little town where I lived, at the outskirts there were around 10 fully operational factories manufacturing glass, sugar and whatever, now the area is full of piles of debris and nobody was ever held accountable for that.

Also I heard from the forums Yugoslavia also paid their external debt. By the way, I heard of news articles claiming that technology in the Romanian factories was completely obsolete and unable to keep up with the times. Yet I also heard people who lived then who said that many factories were using the newest technologies, so I would say this idea spread in the western media was not 100% reliable and they merely sought to slander the regime by any means they had, but was partly true as maybe Romanian technology could not complete with other top powers. Coming back, after graduation of university or high school, every single personm, male or female, would be given a job based on their knowledge and qualifications as the unemployment was unexistent back then. Because the state was socialist (it was literally called The Soclialist Republic of Romania) every single family would be given for free a house or appartment depending on how many kids they have. Also the state encouraged demographic growth.

- the regime was against jewish international influence and would not obey to their orders or economical enslavement, I think this is the reason why it happened what happened.

Now the disadvantages:

- Romania did pay its external debt, but this was achieved also by starving the nation. As far as I know, in every family, every individual was allowed a certain amount of basic food aliments (rice, flour, oil, milk, bread, eggs etc) and this amount was obviously not enough to feed the nation, something like, each individual was allowed in a week 1 bread, 250 ml of oil, 4-5 eggs and so on. Also instead of meat people would receive some sort of soy alternative and meat consumption was very limited as far as I heard. Obviously, this rationalization (that's how we called it, a national ratio of food for each individual) did only apply to the citizens. I heard the politicians were having things like meat or cheese at their discretion, while most people starved. Probably this caused the general hate and tensions that the foreign powers fed upon to organize the 1989 coup. What else was rationalized was the gas, electricity and hot water. I heard in the winter people have to stay with thick clothes inside the house and would turn on the cooker to generate more heat. Also they would have electricity only for a few hours per day and children would study or do their homework by the candle's light. I heard people living in countryside and producing off their lands had to give much of their production to the government. Yet what I heard but I am not sure about, some people claim that this rationalization happened without the knowledge and permission of Ceausescu, and that whenever he was announcing a visit in a city, the `Security` (the name of the State Police) would fill up the shelves of surrounding shops so he can see that they are completely full. I also heard that Ceausescu would have stated that once the external debt was paid, more food was about to be introduced and sold in the shops across the country. Since this completely contradicts the previous statement, I don't know if either of them are true.

- people were not allowed to leave the country. One would argue this goes against human's right of free movement, which might be true given that I heard border police would shoot after people caught to illegaly cross the border. I don't know how many or if people would have been killed in such shootings though.

- the state was atheist, which is good if you think about christianity but it completely condemned a spiritual movement that was growing around `85s called `the transcedental meditation`, which you can read about in English here. People caught to practice such meditations (including yoga as far as I heard) would be imprisoned or stripped of their careers and humiliated by being forced to do `lower` jobs like sweeping the streets or bin collectors.

- corruption was still existent then even if not at the level of after 1989. For example Ceausescu would put all his family in high positions in the state even if they did not have any qualification for what they were doing and probably this applied to other high ranking politicians but as I said, this is absolutely nothing compared to nowadays and generally after 1989.

- the TV channels were very limited and I heard most of them would only be glorifying the leader Ceausescu most of the time (cult of personality as mentionned at the beginning). Also his birthday was a sort of national day. The emission would be limited anyway because of rationalized electricity.

- I heard the conditions in millitary instruction barracks (millitary instruction was mandatory for everybody) were very though and people were humiliated constantly. Millitary instruction in itself is good as long as is about educating people and not humiliating them and treating them like objects, which I heard was the case back then

Probably there were other disadvantages and negative aspects that I am not aware of but the reality is, this regime was destroyed because it opposed jewish globalism and not because of simpathy for this nation from the world powers. That is nonsense. If it was about `simpatju` then Kim Jong Un would probably be dead long ago and North Korea would be `democratic` Anyway people who miss this regime are either more poor now than they were then, either are broken down to see their country destroyed like this, with a millions of people fleeing the country and the economy taken over by foreign corporations and the country deliberately forced into debt again to be enslaved economically. It is difficult for me to be fully pro or fully against this regime because I cannot ignore the bad things they did to people by starving them and locking them forcefully inside the country but nor the good things that brought independence to the country, which most of the population absolutely misses now even though most people quite dislike the regime. Is a very controversial subject and I consider that being fully pro or against it is rather inconsistent and ignorant. We should have taken what was good from there (economy, industry, education, army) and destroy/remove what was negative (rationalization/starvation, cult of personality, harsh conditions of living etc). A jewish communist bolshevik schooled in Moskow was named as president after faking some elections and he started the systematic destruction of the country, for which most of the nation wish him the worst to this day,

The Alchemist7 said:

satanama666 said:

why do some romanians still admire this communist dictator?what bad things did he do that i can use as arguments to refute them,since not much is known about him besides communist propaganda?

Click to expand...

Because most of them are boomers and with time you have lower chances of remembering the bad things (nostalgia) and only the good things, most of them were the fact that they offered a work place and free house (yes i can say this was good) but the rest was a pile of trash.

Note that I will only express my personal views on this based on what I read and what I spoke with other people, and I am aware that there might be people here who have way more accurate and realistic information than I have.

I don't know if you are Romanian but the reality is, this regime had both advantages and disadvantages, good in some ways but negative in other ways.

Click to expand...

[/quote]
. The leader before him was a jewish bolshevik but he was a gentile who tried to create a country as powerful
[/quote]
Excuse me... did you just said that Ceausescu was a gentile or i am slow mentally!?


[/quote]
- the education system war far better then than now. You must to have been a genius to become a doctor or manager or similar career. Nowadays if you have enough money you can buy university degrees, maters and PhDs without studying anything, and also be given power positions in different companies if you have friends in politics. This corruption was not neccesarily unexistent in communist times but was far lower comparing to now.
[/quote]
The education system just like today was based on fear and manipulation, shaming kids and threatening them with beatings, yes in communism teacher beated the hell out of their students from a very young age if they didn't do their homework, or haven't learn the leasson etc.
I have stories from my father how he learned better then the teacher took his head and smashed against the table saying '' you see <insert name>, you can do better!''
Oh boy... let's not forget that every friend you made in school could be a ''special'' kid that was put there to search for people who are not loyal to the regime, forgot their name sadly.


[/quote]
- the army was far more powerful and better organized then than now. In fact, most of the Romanian millitary technology was either destroyed, either sold for nothing (the Navy for example, sold by the former jewish president probably for a good bribe). Also, it was probably a top 5 army in Euope, probably this is the reason US and USSR decided to engineer a coup instead of doing what they did in Yugoslavia (which was a very similar country by the way), because in a war against Romania they would have obviously won as they were the global millitary powers but probably with considerable casualties because the Romanian army was well organized and had at the time equipment and artillery that could easily compete with any other country in Europe, For example they used to have both sovietic MIGs and also Romanian own aircraft which was considered to be at least at the same level. Now Romania is forced to import third hand 40 years old F-16 from US, which is probably trash compared to what they used to have
[/quote]
Ah yes the army... you know that... EVERYONE was allowed in the army right, including people with mental illnesses and other kind that should not be there, how many stories are there in the communism army with someone that had nasty mental illness, wait i remember a few:
There was someone who always did what others told him, i mean.... everything, more like a broken reflex, like his fellows told him to jump from the table he would do it, if he drive straight and someone told him to drive into a river he would do it, it was crazy.
Another one was someone with schizophrenia (dont remember) and he nearly killed another soldier because he walker around with the gun loaded into his chest and he didn't knew what he was doing, or how he pulled the pin of a grenade out of the random.


[/quote]
- the economy and industry were far more developed and competent then than now. The country was importing little and exporting everything, this is how Romania was the only country in the history to fully pay their external debt, which as far as I remember was $20 billion at the time. The vast majority of the industrly was either completely destroyed by corrupted directors after 1989 to enrich themselves, either sold for nearly free to western corporations for big bribes to politicians, corporations which accaparated the entire Romanian economy. Even in the little town where I lived, at the outskirts there were around 10 fully operational factories manufacturing glass, sugar and whatever, now the area is full of piles of debris and nobody was ever held accountable for that.
[/quote]
Most of the industry accepted people that literary were like water and oil to that type of work, they were employed just to have a job and not a role, most of the products were chinese type of quality.
And with the external debts, yesss kingggg, pay money to kikes and starve your peopleee WOOO HOOO, Ceausescu sigma grindset i suppose.
[/quote]

Yes i understand that is just an opinion but i nearly had a stroke by reading this...
I hope i dont have too many grammatical errors and that i formed the quotes right.

The Alchemist7 said:

Yet what I heard but I am not sure about, some people claim that this rationalization happened without the knowledge and permission of Ceausescu, and that whenever he was announcing a visit in a city, the `Security` (the name of the State Police) would fill up the shelves of surrounding shops so he can see that they are completely full. I also heard that Ceausescu would have stated that once the external debt was paid, more food was about to be introduced and sold in the shops across the country. Since this completely contradicts the previous statement, I don't know if either of them are true.

Click to expand...

Ceausescu's reign is a very interesting topic. People claim that the good parts that you've so eloquently presented dominated Romania for decades under his rule. And even travel was allowed, however controlled and mostly to friendly nations (which was the Soviet block and Qaddafi's Lybia).

The problems only started appearing in his last decade (the '80). After a visit he made to North Korea he began implementing a similar cult of personality propaganda. Considering that he also began paying the country's debt, he inadvertently created the perfect opportunity for his enemies. They began fomenting dissent through resource rationalization while isolating him at the same time.

He was probably only fed doctored reports. His country visits were always preceded by secret service staging "the wealth" -- filling up the groceries with produce, hanging up fake apples, and even adding painted panels of ripe corn in the fields. I can confirm these things with a decent level of certainty.

If you watch the video recording of his last address to the public, you can clearly see the shock on his face when the crowd began to get agitated. He looks like a confused old man who bought his own propaganda (he was 71 in 1989).

What's incredible is how he managed to remain oblivious to the fact that virtually nobody around him remained loyal. What's even more outrageous is that while people had real grievances and were genuinely rebelling, the entire course of events is mired in confusion, with strange witness accounts of foreign military units and snipers attacking the population, and of conflicting orders and reports within the army. The presidential couple's summary "trial" & execution is also highly incriminating.

The revolution was clearly many years in the making and designed to be used as a cover story for the actual coup-d'etat. This says to me that Ceausescu was genuinely doing his the best for Romania but got defeated by a bunch of scheming house kikes and his own inability to establish trusting relationships with his staff.

Inflorescentia said:

The revolution was clearly many years in the making and designed to be used as a cover story for the actual coup-d'etat. This says to me that Ceausescu was genuinely doing his the best for Romania but got defeated by a bunch of scheming house kikes and his own inability to establish trusting relationships with his staff.

Click to expand...

True. I heard there was another failed coup attempt in 1985 or so. He might have been the one giving orders but I wonder to what extent was he really in knowledge of what was happening in the country. Even assuming that his intentions were evil, is difficult for only two people (his wife too) to have full control over absolutely everything since as you said he was surrounded by traitors. If is true that the population was starved without his knowledge or permission, then it would mean he was not the head of all the evil, but then if he ordered the rationalization, I wonder if he really wanted to remove it once the debt was paid, as he would have stated. Still the debt could have been paid in a longer amount of time and without starving the nation, whether he took the decission or not.

Weassel said:

Excuse me... did you just said that Ceausescu was a gentile or i am slow mentally!?

Click to expand...

I don't have any information that he was jewish. In my opinion he doesn't look jewish either. Also is easiest to tell if someone is jewish when they are old as jewish physiognomic features are becoming more and more obvious then. If you have information that he was jewish please share it.

Weassel said:

The education system just like today was based on fear and manipulation, shaming kids and threatening them with beatings, yes in communism teacher beated the hell out of their students from a very young age if they didn't do their homework, or haven't learn the leasson etc.
I have stories from my father how he learned better then the teacher took his head and smashed against the table saying '' you see <insert name>, you can do better!''
Oh boy... let's not forget that every friend you made in school could be a ''special'' kid that was put there to search for people who are not loyal to the regime, forgot their name sadly.

Click to expand...

Indeed you did underline some facts that I did not consider. Is true that many teachers were brutal with the students, probably a big percentage if not most of them, but I was reffering at the quality of the information and not the quality of teachers. I think the information and the way education was structured then was more constructive, more science-focused and more efficient in creating professionals in all domains than it is now. Is true probably the history lessons were communist propaganda but today is no different. But no one can deny that a considerable part of the people who fled the country were very skilled in their domains and they did their education in communist times (doctors, plumbers, electricians, welders, architects, builders etc). Too bad people who studied in the education system after 1989 are not old enough to compare them with the ones who studied in the previous system well before 1989, like comparing their skills or professionalism or knowledge. That would be a good indicative about the quality of the system, But you are right many were abussed to learn by their teachers. I don't know to what extent the country leadership was to blame about this, but if they knew and did nothing, and they most likely knew, then indeed they are to blame for the teachers beating and abussing students to learn.

Weassel said:

Ah yes the army... you know that... EVERYONE was allowed in the army right, including people with mental illnesses and other kind that should not be there, how many stories are there in the communism army with someone that had nasty mental illness, wait i remember a few:
There was someone who always did what others told him, i mean.... everything, more like a broken reflex, like his fellows told him to jump from the table he would do it, if he drive straight and someone told him to drive into a river he would do it, it was crazy.
Another one was someone with schizophrenia (dont remember) and he nearly killed another soldier because he walker around with the gun loaded into his chest and he didn't knew what he was doing, or how he pulled the pin of a grenade out of the random.

Click to expand...

You are right but here again I was comparing the strenght and quality of the army then with the army nowadays. I think nobody can deny that the army was destroyed after 1989. I remember someone was saying about the following president Iliescu saying `We are lowering the number of millitary personnel and artillery but we will modernize it`. Let's be honest nobody modernized anything after 1989, the country was forced to become western colony and buy obsolete and useless technology from the West. But I give you one example why the army was not neccesarily full of mentally ill people, since what you mentionned are only few particular cases. I know of someone who said that Ceausescu saw a film from China were the Chinese army literally torn apart and destroyed protesters of a massive protest that happened there and that he was considering this to be a good method of keeping people under control of protests are to happen. But as you probably know, it is generally accepted that in the 1989 coup the army stood with the people and not against them. As far as I heard there were foreign millitary activists present there who fired at people, as Inflorescence suggested. Was it an attempt to criminalize the army? If is true then I would say yes. Yet is iteresting to note that jews like Ion Iliescu and Gelu Voican Voiculescu were accused for crimes against humanity in the Revolution investigations that followed afterwards, and which are very conveniently still on hold for years.

Weassel said:

And with the external debts, yesss kingggg, pay money to kikes and starve your peopleee WOOO HOOO, Ceausescu sigma grindset i suppose.

Click to expand...

You are right here the money did go to the jewish international mafia, but the question is, what if he decided not to pay the debt at all? This could only end catastrophic for the country, like enforced embargos which would have collapsed the industry, probably war threats. Anyway is not even relevant to debate that starvation/rationalization was a crime and people were rightfully protesting in this regard, irrespective if Ceausescu was directly responsible for rationalization or not. The responsibles deserved to die for this `decision` alone as is not neccesary to starve a whole nation to pay a debt irrespective of how big it is. What I am not sure about if whether Ceausescu was fully behind this or not, as there is evidence that the Security was engineering all this.

The Alchemist7 said:

Inflorescentia said:

The revolution was clearly many years in the making and designed to be used as a cover story for the actual coup-d'etat. This says to me that Ceausescu was genuinely doing his the best for Romania but got defeated by a bunch of scheming house kikes and his own inability to establish trusting relationships with his staff.

Click to expand...

True. I heard there was another failed coup attempt in 1985 or so. He might have been the one giving orders but I wonder to what extent was he really in knowledge of what was happening in the country. Even assuming that his intentions were evil, is difficult for only two people (his wife too) to have full control over absolutely everything since as you said he was surrounded by traitors. If is true that the population was starved without his knowledge or permission, then it would mean he was not the head of all the evil, but then if he ordered the rationalization, I wonder if he really wanted to remove it once the debt was paid, as he would have stated. Still the debt could have been paid in a longer amount of time and without starving the nation, whether he took the decission or not.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I agree that the rapid pay-up was an illogical decision. I'm certain it was his though.

The rationalization order suggests that he was aware that the rapid reimbursement would take a toll on internal supply. But we can never know exactly how specific his orders were, nor how much more of what was required was actually being exported. Just imagine how profitable that period was for high-ranking party members.