In Romania, the word is also used with respect
\nto the association of specific factions of democratic parties with communist
\nparties, for electoral purposes, in the second half of the 1940s. This was in
\nfact one of the communists’ chief strategies in the elections: they attracted
\ndissidents from traditional parties in order to mislead voters and to persuade
\nthem to vote for candidates that were close to the communists. Ahead of the
\nNovember 1946 elections in Romania, groups had splintered from all the
\ntraditional parties, such as the National Peasant Party, the National Liberal
\nParty and the Social Democratic Party. These groups disagreed with their
\nrespective party leaders, and instead were very approving of the coalition
\nheaded by the communists. The Anton Alexandrescu National Peasant Party group
\nhad splintered from the National Peasant Party, the Gheorghe Tatarescu National
\nLiberal Party had splintered from the National Liberal Party, whereas the
\nSocial Democratic Party was taken over completely and its president, Constantin
\nTitel-Petrescu, had to start from scratch. He set up the Independent Social
\nDemocratic Party, which was the true heir of the Romanian Social Democratic
\nlegacy.<\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n
Dan Amedeo Lazarescu, a legal professional who
\nserved time in communist prisons in the 1950s, was a member of the Liberal
\nYouth in the mid-1940s and a witness to all that political scheming.
\nInterviewed by Radio Romania’s Centre for Oral History in 1996, Lazarescu
\nremembers that in the meeting where the National Liberal Party’s election
\nstrategy was being discussed, the leader of the Tatarescu Liberal dissident
\ngroup, Petre Bejan, was urging all Liberals to join the communists in the
\nelection. <\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
Dan Amedeo Lazarescu: We’d
\nbeen told that election-wise, the Communist Party was nothing. The whole
\ncountry would vote for Maniu. Our party was next to nothing, in terms of
\nvoters. So if we went separate way, we would be crushed and only if we stood
\ntogether would be able to succeed. Then my good friend, the brilliant lawyer
\nPatriciu Popescu, who was a great speaker, said: ‘Mister president, the type of
\naction you have pleaded for does not make much sense. You said that
\nelection-wise, the Communist Party is zero. Election-wise, our party is
\nnothing. But does that mean that if the two parties merge, they can win
\nparliamentary majority? What would the outcome of that be, if nothing adds up
\nto nothing? There is something wrong here!’ A round of applause erupted and the
\nsecret voting was again called for. Petre Bejan, insisted for an open voting
\nand more than two thirds voted for running on common voting lists.<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
The liberals who opposed participation in election alongside
\ncommunists, also called opinionists,
\nreturned to the National Liberal Party lead by Dinu Bratianu, the true exponent
\nof Romanian liberalism. <\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
Dan Amedeo Lazarescu: The opinionists,
\nopted for following Dinu Bratianu. Since all of them were my friends,
\nespecially Dumitru Alimanesteanu, Bentoiu and especially Costel Tataranu and
\nAznavorian, I mediated their transition and very quickly they returned, but
\nwith great resistance on the part of some of Dinu Bratianu’s men. The head of
\nthe Neamt Liberal organization, Alexandru Guranda, was strongly against the
\nreturn of the opinionists to the
\nLiberal Patry, yet in the long run Dinu Bratianu was wise enough receive them
\nback. Consequently, Tatarascu and his men decided to run on common voting
\nlists, while the opinionists followed
\nDinu Bratianu. <\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
The Social Democrats had an even tougher fate
\nsince their party was simply confiscated through an internal coup. <\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
Dan Amedeo Lazarescu: With Titel Petrescu
\nthings were a little bit more dramatic. It is here that the government
\nintervened. Around March 17 or 18, 1946, Titel Petrescu decided to run on
\nseparate lists and he had delivered a famous speech at the Athenaeum, a speech
\nthat I heard, where he eulogized the United States, who won the war with the
\nobvious support of the Soviet Union. The enthusiasm was tremendous; the
\nauditorium was packed with people, while in the Palace Square, in front of the
\nAthenaeum, the Social-Democrat youth was chanting slogans in favor of Titel
\nPetrescu. Titel Petrescu however, was very decided not to run on common lists
\nwith the communists, so he asked for a party congress, being confident he would
\nhave the majority. He had appointed his friend, Voitec, as public instructions
\nminister, although Maniu ceded him that ministry on condition that he would
\npersonally run it. He relied less on Lucretiu Patrascanu and lesser on Tudor
\nIonescu, a Radical Party member. Iunian’s Radical Party was made up of 6
\nmembers and each of the 6 members opted for another political group: Ion
\nGheorghe Maurer joined the communists, Misu Paleologu, who was the party’s
\nsecretary general, remained with the Peasant Party, while Tudor Ionescu, my
\nformer Physics professor at the Spiru Haret high-school, a university professor
\nand a mines and oil Minister in the Petru Groza government, joined the Social-Democrats.<\/p>\n
\n
\n
\n
<\/p>\n
The outcome of the November 19, 1946 election
\nproved the then Romanian electorate could not be fooled. The National Peasant
\nParty and the National Liberal Party got 78% of the votes together, while the
\nCommunist-led coalition, jointly with the collaborationists, were unable to get
\nmore than 22% of the votes, despite massive vote rigging. However, in the end,
\nthe result was reversed and from then on, until 1989, political elections were
\na succession of masquerades. <\/p>\n
\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
A lot has been written about political collaborationism in relation to the communist regime and about the political collaborationism of intellectuals in particular<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":127,"featured_media":83019,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[41141],"tags":[42825,40357,42826,42827],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-130662","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-the-history-show","tag-collaborationist","tag-gheorghe","tag-maurer","tag-voitec"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n