Right-Wingers Clash with Police After Romania Bars Populist Calin Georgescu from Polls

balkaninsight.com Attention Required! | Cloudflare

Supporters of Calin Georgescu threw stones and bottles at riot police in Bucharest after the Central Election Bureau voted to bar the right-wing, pro-Russian candidate from competing in upcoming presidential polls.
The Central Election Bureau voted 10-4 to bar Georgescu, saying his candidacy did not meet the legal requirements and that he had “violated the very obligation to defend democracy”.
Georgescu condemned the decision as a “direct blow to the heart of democracy worldwide”. He now has 24 hours from Sunday’s ruling to file an official appeal with Romania’s Constitutional Court, which is expected to issue a decision on Wednesday at the latest.

Southeast Europe @feddit.bg

Pan0wski @infosec.pub

2w ago

Right-Wingers Clash with Police After Romania Bars Populist Calin Georgescu from Polls

balkaninsight.com /2025/03/10/right-wingers-clash-with-police-after-romania-bars-populist-from-polls/

9 1

You're viewing a single thread.

20 comments

It’s just a matter of time before neoliberals will cancel an election where a socialist wins. I’m terrified that people jump with glee as a response to this. You’re only allowed to vote because you voted in a way that didn’t disturb things too much. I’d rather have far right win and prove again that they are incapable of running a country. The only thing we need to save are institutions and neoliberals right now are tearing them down faster than they are ruining economy.
- You rather have millions of people suffer and die than to acknowledge the paradox of tolerance?
  
  I’d rather eat shit now rather than delay it and make it even worse. This doesn’t solve anything, it’s just pretending things are fine.
- I would agree with you if it was not the fact that the right are very intolerant and hateful people meaning more people would suffer. This is not like politics from 20 years ago where it was a minor policy difference separating the parties, the right are actively working to remove rights from people.
  
  So, essentially, you don’t want democracy anymore because results are way too different from what you expect. Precisely what I was talking about.
  
  If you think the right are going to usher in a golden age of democracy then I don’t think you have been paying attention to what has been happening or what they have been saying.
  
  By the time right gets to power democratic institutions will be demolished by neoliberals already. Neoliberals are destroying them because it allows them to rule for a couple more years, amass even more wealth and weather the incoming catastrophe, not because of concern for your wellbeing.
  
  Liberals are by far the lesser of the two evils. Once again I would urge you to pay attention to what the right say and do. They talk of freedoms while stripping it away from others. You speak of liberals enriching themselves when as an example in the US Trump has reduced the taxes on the wealthy while the cost of living is increasing thats looks like the wealthy being given quite the enriching opportunity . Here in Australia our right leaning politician Peter Dutton has amassed a fortune through his political career and is quite friendly with mining the magnates. So please do tell me how the right still enrich but also take away the rights of woman to access to abortions, people wanting to transition and pose a general threat to who they perceive as immigrants even if they are legal in most countries is the better of the two.
  
  Liberals are by far the lesser of the two evils.
  No. Economic violence is violence too.
  How long can this go on? When will they stop? If it’s up to liberals then never and at the end of that graph there’s monarchy. People want out but you won’t let them.
  
  Do you think that the far right would conduct less economic violence?
  
  It’s a tossup if they go for free market Mad Max or if they start doing handouts to the elderly in exchange for votes. With liberals the first one is guaranteed. Ultimately it’s up to the voters to choose and not internet commentators like us. That right was denied to them.
  
  I think that America is currently doing a fine job of demonstrating how there are ways to do economic violence faster than neoliberalism
  For the people to choose, there has to be some measure of a level playing field and informed undestanding of the options. The influence campaign in support of Georgescu violated those principles
  
  Trump is a moron when it comes to economics but he’s not really a political ideologue rather than a grifter surrounded by a mixture of neoliberals and fascists unified by a common goal of making money. What’s happening in America is just late stages of neoliberalism which converges with fascism as time goes on.
  As to influence campaigns - everything is one. Our conversation is an influence campaign so where do you draw the line? I’ve seen many attempts but it always looked like it wasn’t done in good faith by any of the sides. You’ll probably say this is financed covertly and used social media to distort truth. This description matches how free market economics are being force fed by mainstream media owned by the most wealthy. I’m for banning all or nothing, otherwise it’s just a tool for politicians to gain unfair advantage over others.
  
  I think you are just trying to make an argument without absorbing what I am saying, I am not saying Liberals policies are always great for the economy either. The wealth inequality is going to get worse and the only way to correct this is to tax the top more.
  But show me in conservative history where they have attempted to correct this same issue? Their policies are just as bad if not worse in case of Trump with his tarrifs kicking of a trade war and that cost is going to be passed onto the consumer which is excellerating what your concern is. The only reason the inequality is maybe not as bad in countries like my own that have strong worker laws that allow/force better wages/salaries. But make no mistake if we or other countries like ours still do not increase the tax on the wealthy then that gap will increase as well.
  This all sounds like you are just spewing debates points without truly understanding any of it, try and do some research please before you try again.
  Edit: Added a point to further clarify my view.
- I agree. Annul an election if you suspect interference, sure, but banning a candidate is downright undemocratic. It won't even achieve their goal because it'll give him and whoever he chooses to run instead of him a ton of extra publicity+popularity anyway.
  
  Given that the nature of the interference in favour of Georgescu was an influence campaign, surely letting him run is just letting the interference happen? The effects of it don't disappear just because you do a second vote

20 comments