Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The Romanian presidential election two weeks ago exposed graphically the blatant hypocrisy and total abandonment of even the pretence of moral principle in the collective West.

From a field of half a dozen candidates, the winner by plurality of votes was political unknown Calin Georgescu. On 8 December the electoral process will undergo a second round for voters to decide who the next President of Romania will be. In the runoff, competing against Georgescu will be the candidate favoured by the European Union and NATO, Elena-Valerica Lasconi. An outcome where their candidate comes in second is a humiliation for the powers that be. They do not brook their will being challenged because they are accustomed invariably to impose their preferences upon the insouciant and politically naïve public. The reasons for their present chagrin are understandable. Notwithstanding ringing endorsements as well as ample financial and media support from the highest places, in the first round establishment candidate Lasconi trailed by several percentage points political newcomer Georgescu, who was running a shoestring campaign with a skeletal staff.

Accordingly, the day after the first round the smear campaign, featuring all the standard epithets, was launched. Energetic measures were promptly taken not just to dispute Georgescu’s extraordinary electoral result but if possible to eliminate him from the presidential race altogether. The rationales put forward by the globalist establishment were in part characteristically hypocritical and in part laughably preposterous.

The hypocritical part consisted of the allegation that Georgescu’s victory was obtained unfairly due to the votes overwhelmingly cast for him by the Romanian diaspora in European Union countries. Subsequent polls confirmed that this allegation was spot on. But why should that have been a problem? The diaspora voters are also Romanian citizens.

The preposterous claim, upon which the brazen demand to invalidate Georgescu’s candidacy was based, was that the social media network TikTok, which Georgescu used extensively to broadcast his message to Romanian voters, all other media outlets being closed to him, unfairly favoured his campaign and thus enabled his victory. Miraculously, the Romanian Supreme Court, to which the matter was referred for adjudication, had enough common sense and professional probity to dismiss this unscrupulous lawfare attack.

The frivolous charge about diaspora support was made with the evident aim of delegitimising Georgescu’s electoral triumph. The establishment operatives who made it clearly hold the public for amnesiac idiots with a serious Attention Deficit Disorder. They thought that everyone had conveniently forgotten that barely three weeks before, in neighbouring Moldova, their favoured candidate Maia Sandu, the Moldovan equivalent of Elena Lasconi, was proclaimed winner in that country’s presidential election, where it was precisely the EU diaspora vote that made the critical difference to her advantage. In fact, the Moldovan election was deliberately rigged to favour Sandu by counting diaspora votes from the European Union, where it was anticipated that she would garner strong support whilst disqualifying Moldovan diaspora votes from Russia, where her opponent was thought to be ahead.

But in contemporary collective West’s outcome-based, utilitarian political thinking, level playing field is an unheard of concept. Whether a political actor is allowed to win, regardless of the degree of popular support he enjoys, depends not on satisfying democratic procedural requirements (such as winning the most votes, for instance) but entirely on his ideological suitability and servile willingness to put the globalist cabal’s objectives ahead of his nation’s interests. Conversely, a non-compliant actor, such as Georgescu appears to be, must at any cost be barred from winning, regardless of how much popular support he may enjoy.

Georgescu’s opponent Elena Lasconi obviously knows how that game is played and she is an eager player in it. In a soft-ball promotional interview on Romanian television the other day she adroitly hit all the right notes. Dismissing Georgescu’s scepticism about NATO and the European Union, and speaking over the heads of the Romanian electorate, she reassured her foreign handlers of her unswerving support for Romania’s membership in the Western military and political system and fully acceptance of Romania’s obligation to actively participate in NATO’s military preparations.

Quality of life issues that are of primary interest to the Romanian public have been all but ignored by Lasconi in her campaign pronouncements as she stressed to the voters the only issue that is of interest to her foreign sponsors: “to ensure Romania does not change course.”

And that according to her can mean only one thing, that “we must choose between NATO protection and Putin’s war. We must choose between the EU’s prosperity and freedom of movement, or the sound of tanks coming from the Kremlin.”

With such demagogic platitudes it is not clear how Lasconi managed to qualify even for second place. But the relative success she did achieve, albeit not without the colossal advantages that the global establishment always confers on its minions, points to the serious degradation of control mechanisms that have been meticulously put in place precisely to prevent the appearance of an unvetted upstart such as Calin Georgescu. The reasons for the globalist Establishment’s consternation are clear and from their standpoint fully justified.

A brief summary of Georgescu’s political and moral credo demonstrates why it is so. He is an unapologetic “Romania Firster” who, unlike his opponent Lasconi, eschews “internationalist obligations” (many will recall that colourful former East Bloc phrase that has now been resurrected and put to good use by the collective West) and he insists on applying the litmus test of “Is it good for Romania?” He also demands that his country be treated with dignity and as an equal in the councils of NATO and the EU, should it decide to remain in those structures. As a devout Orthodox Christian, Georgescu let it slip that he views current events in apocalyptic terms, hardly a good recommendation for a reliable team player, and he has denounced the entire range of global elite’s aggressively deployed instruments used as battering rams for the demolition of traditional cultures and societies. He has also committed himself, if elected, to block Ukrainian grain exports through Romanian ports and to stop further military assistance from Romania to the Neo-Nazi regime in Kiev. Need we list more of this man’s grave political sins which make him so obviously unsuitable, or does this suffice to explain his low rating in the relevant corridors of power?

Of course, no one should be taken at face value based on mere rhetoric. Georgescu does have an interesting past, having served as a functionary at the UN where, as an insider, he mingled with the very circles that he is now prepared to repudiate. But so did Viktor Orban; and St Paul comes to mind as another influential figure who experienced a transformative and authentic change of heart.

Calin Georgescu ought to be given the benefit of the doubt. On 8 December, the good people of Romania should be encouraged to vote with wisdom and discernment.

NOTE: On 2 December it was reported that the Constitutional Court of Romania had rejected challenges to the outcome of the first round of Presidential elections and validated the official result, paving the way for the second round to take place as scheduled on 8 December. That decision should have been final, according to the AP report from Bucharest. However, on Friday, 6 December, the Constitutional Court apparently reversed itself and invalidated the election result, citing declassified intelligence information purportedly showing that the electoral process in the first round was tainted by “Russian interference.” According to the London Guardian, “The momentous move by the court effectively voids the national election, which will have to be re-run.” The Court’s bizarre conduct strongly suggests that the judges were acting under irresistible NATO and European Union pressure, basing their new decision on “intelligence information” that was hastily and specifically concocted to give an appearance of legality and plausibility to crude interference in Romania’s democratic process on the part of collective West interests. It remains to be seen how presidential candidate and first round winner Calin Georgescu and the Romanian public will react to this unprecedented violation of their democratic rights.