topics
The phenomenon of the candidate for the presidency of Romania, Georgescu, is a demonstration of how the majority of Romanians have risen up against the “captured state,” demanding the liberation of institutions - a goal achievable only through the complete dismantling of the current political class.
Opinion polls showed that in the second round Georgescu would get 62-67% of voter support, after which the election was canceled and the runoff never took place.
In December 2024, Calin Georgescu was talked about as a big surprise. Unknown to the general public, he was seen as an expert in political circles: he was Executive Director of the National Center of Sustainable Development (1997–2013), briefly Executive Director of the United Nations Global Sustainable Index Institute in Geneva (2015–2016), and in 2010 he served as State Secretary (Deputy Minister) at the Ministry of Environment. He entered the election campaign as an absolute outsider, and then in just two months he turned the tide of political processes in Romania. The winner of the first round of the presidential election was denied the right to become head of state by a scandalous decision of the Constitutional Court. According to public opinion polls, in the second round of the presidential election, Georgescu would have won 62-67% of the vote. The elections were annulled, the second round was never held. Since then, an incredible campaign has been waged against Georgescu, involving political parties, the media, and state institutions.
However, his rating has remained stable. According to current surveys, in the new presidential elections scheduled for May 4, he would win between 38.4% and 44.1% of the vote in the first round. Which again leads to the logical conclusion of a certain victory in the second round. And which leads to the logical conclusion that we are no longer talking about the “Georgescu surprise,” but the “Georgescu phenomenon.” That is why, by brutal manipulations, Georgescu was banned from running in the May elections. Surprises come and go, they are passing, and phenomena lasts and leaves a deep political imprint.
The accusations against Georgescu from December were never proven. The second round of the presidential election was canceled due to suspicions that some external factors had interfered in the election campaign. The euphemism “external factors” meant Russia, and the election campaign actually meant the activities of Georgescu’s election headquarters on the TikTok platform. Since nothing was proven, new accusations now had to be fabricated.
Initially, the prosecution ordered the apprehension of Georgescu for “incitement to actions against the constitutional order,” “communication of false information,” and involvement in the establishment of an organization of “fascist, racist or xenophobic character.” Romanian media are reporting details on which the prosecution’s suspicions are based, and these are again linked either to putting in some specific context certain old statements by Georgescu, or to his private correspondence with people who are claimed to be close to him and to be “legionaries.” Where there are “legionnaires,” there is also the “Iron Guard,” and being a supporter of this paramilitary formation is not only very serious, but also punishable by law. Otherwise, legionnaires are associated with a movement founded in 1927 (the Legion of the Archangel Michael) which was anti-democratic, anti-capitalist, anti-communist, and anti-Semitic. The Legion had a short but very turbulent history. This ideological framework effectively predestined them to be collaborators with the German Nazis, but it later turned out that the German services participated in the demolition of the Iron Guard, a paramilitary legionary organization. Ion Antonescu, the Romanian leader, concluded a pact with the legion, and Romania was even proclaimed a “National Legionary State” at the beginning of his reign, but he soon entered into conflict with the legionaries, which cost them dearly. Disintegrated in every way, the legionnaires ended up on various sides in the post-war years. Edward Baer writes that some of them, who remained in Romania, even worked for the new communist authorities on tasks of crushing the counter-revolutionary opposition (possibly in revenge to groups that remained with Antonescu). Roland Clark states that, like numerous other European fascists and nationalists in the Cold War era, some of those who emigrated were accepted by the American intelligence community to serve them in the fight against the socialist authorities.
On the one hand, the legionnaires are perceived as collaborators, often identified with the Iron Guard – responsible for the horrific crimes against the Jewish population in Bucharest and Iași. On the other hand, historian Stanley Payne states that “the Legion was probably the most unusual mass movement of interwar Europe.” Depending on what is being looked at – ideology, political practice or the activities of a paramilitary organization – the attitude of observers is shaped accordingly.
One of the most famous legionnaires, for example, was Mircea Eliade, who in his later work also relied on the philosophy of mysticism that legionnaire ideology was hugely based on. Therefore, one can argue with Romanians on this topic for a long time. Logically, for those who want to judge Georgescu, the association with the legion is first to be mentioned, and then the un-destined Romanian president from the last election is also accused of being a fascist and an anti-Semite. However, here is the question: if all of this is true, why wasn’t Georgescu accused of the same thing before the last election? How was a declared fascist and a confirmed anti-Semite allowed to run in 2024? Also, it’s not entirely clear how a “Russian candidate” can be a supporter of fascism at the same time? Supporters of fascism are not with Russia, but with various Ukrainian political and (para)military organizations.
Romania of the 21st century represents a true “captured state.”
Despite everything, first the State Election Commission challenged Georgescu’s candidacy after his arrest, and then the Supreme Court rejected his appeal. Of course, it is clear what is at stake here. Since December, in continuity, the judicial branch of power has been used to eliminate an anti-systemic candidate who could win the elections. However, the big question now is: how will the elimination of Georgescu further affect the political processes in Romania? Because he is no longer a surprise, but a phenomenon. And state institutions also helped in this.
How did it happen that an anonymous candidate, without the support of any of the major parties, without a large budget, became a phenomenon in just a few months? Certainly, a lot is because of Georgescu himself. In the presidential elections, people vote for the candidate, a large number of voters clearly identify with him. However, a lot of it is also because of the character of Romanian politics and the social processes that are taking place in practically all countries of Southeast Europe. On the one hand, integration into the EU and NATO has created a political class, a layer of people gathered around parties, NGOs, government bodies and international organizations, which over time has become completely alienated from the people. This process is very reminiscent of the formation of the so-called nomenklatura in communist states during the Cold War period. The political class faithfully implements all the strategies and doctrines of various supranational structures, from the EU to the World Economic Forum, for them there are no doubts about this, all national interests are subordinated to it. On the other hand, state institutions are occupied by the political class and essentially designed so that they do not meet the needs of citizens, but the needs of supranational structures. The political class, as the guardian of the interests of supranational structures, maintains its function by abusing state institutions. From a theoretical point of view, this is a classic example of a captured state.
Romania, an important member of the EU and NATO, country with great potentials, is faced with two big crises that could take a long time: the crisis of the legitimacy and the institutional crisis. The political class has no legitimacy to rule in the way it is used to, and because of this kind of misappropriations the faith is lost in the institutions. The phenomenon of Georgescu actually shows that Romanians rose in majority against the captured state, which means that they require the release of the institution, which can only be done through dismantling of political class. And that is far more serious than presidential elections or the destiny of one candidate.
