During communist times, shortages were the
\nnorm, and some historians even speak of a culture of shortages. In the 1980s,
\nwhen poverty had become generalised and more acute than ever, shortages of all
\nkind were a fact of life. Historians have looked into letters written by
\nordinary people to institutions of the state, complaining about this fact. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
Given the deplorable economic situation caused
\nby the policies of an incompetent and obsessive regime, relationships between
\npeople were deeply affected by the culture of shortages. Historian Mioara
\nAnton, from the Nicolae Iorga History Institute of Bucharest, described the
\nmechanism: <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
The shortages, the restrictions, the rations
\nimposed by the Ceausescu regime to hide a disastrous economic reality often
\ngenerated ingenious solutions to make everything permitted and accessible.
\nInformal networks were thus created able to provide a solution to apparently
\ninsurmountable problems of everyday life, from facilitating an abortion to
\nobtaining a better job, getting away with a misdemeanour or obtaining goods.
\nThese networks involved people from all walks of life, with all kinds of
\ninterests and needs. Informal networks were based on rules different from the
\nofficial norm, and were a profitable alternative, especially for whoever ran
\nthem, but also for the people who had to resort to them. This secondary economy
\nwas dependent on the state sector, using its resources and channels of
\ndistribution.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
These social networks overlapped with the
\nauthorities and the official policies. Even though they created underground
\nsocietal models, they were closely tied to everyday life, and the authorities
\nwere perfectly aware of their existence. Mioara Anton explains: <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
Informal networks were typical of communist
\nregimes. They existed not only in Romania, but also all over the communist
\nbloc. Documentary sources such as memoirs, diaries, interviews with small time
\nactivists, the people who got by and the artisans of the networks that ran
\nthrough every party and state structure allow us to put together an image of
\neveryday practices at the time. We also have official documents, notes and
\nreports, which show the development and importance of these networks within the
\nwhole of the command economy. Their multiplication was directly tied in with
\nthe criminalisation of the practice in the sense of an expansion of the
\nphenomenon of corruption and the generalisation of shortages. For example, the
\ncampaign to eradicate baksheesh initiated in the early 1970, alongside the
\nfight against social parasites, were among the few public attempts of the
\nregime to mobilise society to institute norms to be generally accepted, which,
\naccording to official rhetoric, would have led to all citizens behaving
\ncorrectly.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
The regime attempted to react against the ill
\neffects of shortages. Historian Mioara Anton once again: <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
As the state’s economic development programmes
\nstarted failing, new rules were issued to manage shortages. One example is a
\nprogramme for self-management and self-provision launched in 1981, which barred
\npeople from purchasing goods from anywhere else than their place of residence.
\nA year later, the Rational Nutrition Programme was introduced, followed by
\nration cards, alongside special legislation that punished economic activities
\ngenerated by shortagaes. The Ceausescu regime never admitted to the utter
\nfailure of central planning reflected in the five-year plan of quality or that
\nof scientific revolution. In 1982, Iulian Dobrescu, head of production planning,
\ntried to persuade Ceausescu to adapt production planning to world economic
\ntrends, but that was to no avail. Dobrescu insisted that a fair quality to
\nquantity ratio would have led to economic growth and less shortage for the
\npopulation. His suggestions were ignored, and he resigned.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
At first sight, shortages were the result of
\nthe economic crisis, but in fact they were rooted in the nature of the regime,
\naccording to historian Mioara Anton: <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
Another factor that encouraged the development
\nof the informal economy was what American historian Ken Jowitt called the
\n‘familism’ of the regime. The party’s monopoly was undermined by a culture of
\nclientelism within the political elites that facilitated illegal or
\nsemi-illegal transactions. The party allowed and even encouraged certain
\ntraditional political attitudes and behaviour in the top tiers of the party and
\nsociety. The image that the head of the party had of reality was more than
\noptimistic. In his opinion, per capita consumption had risen, there was a wide
\narray of products available in shops, even if they didn’t cater to all tastes,
\nand healthcare was at normal levels.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
The culture of shortages ended in 1989 with the
\ncollapse of the communist regime. Its legacy, however, in the form of informal
\nunderground networks, survived its fall, becoming the foundation of the
\nemerging market economy. <\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
During communist times, shortages were the norm, and some historians even speak of a \u201cculture of shortages.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":127,"featured_media":129502,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[41141],"tags":[32441,19347],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-129501","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-history-show","tag-communism","tag-romania"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n