Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 42

Thread: Footage of Ceaușescu's Romania

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    275
    Rep Power
    12

    Default Footage of Ceaușescu's Romania

    For anyone who is interested, I found 3 hours of footage from Nicolae Ceaușescu's Romania with English subtitles:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1h50di3Bc6g
    [FONT=Arial Narrow]"Body tissue deprived of life energy turns cancerous. Cancer is the hysteria of cells condemned to death. Cancer and fascism are closely related. Fascism is the frenzy of sexual cripples. The swastika owes its magnetism to being a symbol of two bodies locked in genital embrace. It all stems from a longing for love. Comrades, make love joyously and without fear."

    [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma]Khrushchev: "Its interesting, isnt it? Im of working class origin while your family were landlords."
    Zhou: "Yes, and we each betrayed our class!"[/FONT]

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Robespierres Neck For This Useful Post:


  3. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    the Netherlands
    Posts
    1,145
    Organisation
    Communistisch Platform - Kompas
    Blog Entries
    6
    Rep Power
    41

    Default

    I have never heard good things about this guy.
    I have only heard that a lot of kids were taken away from their parents. Is that true?
    Is this resistance or a costume party?
    Either way I think black with bandanas is a boring theme.

    fka Creep

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Lietuva
    Posts
    634
    Organisation
    CPGB-PCC sympathiser.
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    ''Ceausescu, happy birthday!'' *chant* * applause*

    His personality cult sickens me.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to Deicide For This Useful Post:


  6. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    275
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Negative Creep View Post
    I have never heard good things about this guy.
    I have only heard that a lot of kids were taken away from their parents. Is that true?
    Yes, they were his own little state puppets.
    [FONT=Arial Narrow]"Body tissue deprived of life energy turns cancerous. Cancer is the hysteria of cells condemned to death. Cancer and fascism are closely related. Fascism is the frenzy of sexual cripples. The swastika owes its magnetism to being a symbol of two bodies locked in genital embrace. It all stems from a longing for love. Comrades, make love joyously and without fear."

    [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma]Khrushchev: "Its interesting, isnt it? Im of working class origin while your family were landlords."
    Zhou: "Yes, and we each betrayed our class!"[/FONT]

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to Robespierres Neck For This Useful Post:


  8. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    the Netherlands
    Posts
    1,145
    Organisation
    Communistisch Platform - Kompas
    Blog Entries
    6
    Rep Power
    41

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by darforthewin View Post
    Yes, they were his own little state puppets.
    What do you mean?
    Is this resistance or a costume party?
    Either way I think black with bandanas is a boring theme.

    fka Creep

  9. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Ultima Thule
    Posts
    382
    Organisation
    The Church of Latter day Communards
    Rep Power
    11

    Default

    I saw this movie at the Reykjavik International Film Festival last year. It is a kind of a mock-autobiography of Ceausescu. Its entirely composed of official footage from The Romanian National Television and National Film Archives. Its in chronological order and is supposed to be telling the story from Ceausescus point of view, which is an important part of its ironical character. In some ways it attempts to mimic fictional historical epics. It contains some interesting material and is worth seeing if the topic interests you. Its ironical character is its strongest point though IMO.
    IMDB link:www.imdb.com/title/tt1646958/
    "Give me a place to stand, and I will sit on your face."
    - Trotsky in the opening speech to the third congress of the Fourth International.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Mass Grave Aesthetics For This Useful Post:


  11. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    492
    Rep Power
    8

    Default

    Interesting video.

    Let's discuss.

    1. Why was Ceausescu the only eastern block leader to eat lead? Is it because he was a brutal tyrant unlike other, much softer leaders, such as Honecker.

    2. In connection with the first question; What was life in Romania like compared to other Eastern European countries? I mean here their socio-economic well-being compared with that of Bulgaria, GDR, Yugoslavia, etc.

    3. What interesting facts can be brought up

    4. Is there a segment of Romania's current population who regrets the way the situation was dealt with?

    5. How was he able to maintain his notorious 'maverick' style? How was he able to condemn the crushing of the Prague Spring, while all other leaders endorsed it? How was he able to maintain relations with Israel? etc.

    6. How wide spread was the movement to topple him, was it just a small group of ex-loyalists? Who was involved, how widespread was it?
    Without the struggle for socialism, life has no meaning (J. Posadas)

    He who has iron, has bread (L.A. Blanqui)

  12. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    69
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Blanquist View Post
    1. Why was Ceausescu the only eastern block leader to eat lead? Is it because he was a brutal tyrant unlike other, much softer leaders, such as Honecker.
    I suppose all the other leaders in Eastern Europe were not so dominant, with the party itself being the 'leading power', whereas Ceasusescu had created a much greater personality cult, and portrayed himself as the 'Conductor' of the Romanians, so the regimes power was identified more him. Its worth noting that it was the security forces who first opened fire in Romania in 1989 against protestors, something which largely (or mostly?) the rest of the Eastern Bloc refrained from. Many also suspect that he was executed by the army quickly so that he could not speak out against others who were complicit in his regime. The fact that Romania was one of the last in Eastern Europe to go, i suppose many within the Army and authorities felt the system could not go on, but the personal power and cult of Ceausescu (and it his 12 relatives in high rank position of power) convinced them that he had to be removed before the Communist Power could cede power (and also killing him would save their own butts)

    Quote Originally Posted by Blanquist View Post
    2. In connection with the first question; What was life in Romania like compared to other Eastern European countries? I mean here their socio-economic well-being compared with that of Bulgaria, GDR, Yugoslavia, etc.
    Im not entirely sure but from the 1980s many saw increase in poverty and harder living standards as loans had to be paid back from the west, as well as extravagant and pointless policies from the Conductor. The substantial Hungarian minority of Transylvania faced discrimination as Romanian nationalism increased in the 1960s onwards (Romania was originally designated a multiethnic state after WW2, but it then changed itself to a uni-ethnic Romanian state). In 1977 miners went on strike.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blanquist View Post
    3. What interesting facts can be brought up
    Many of the Iron Guards after WW2 decided to defect to the Communist controlled security forces.

    The Hungarian and Romanian presses both engaged in an open media war over Romania's Hungarian minority.

    Romania living within a certain kilometre distance to the Hungarian border were allowed to cross over for the day. For many on the border regions, this become a vital part of maintaining a relatively ok level of subsistence, as they would sell the cheap goods Romania had in excess or what they had stolen from the factory, to the Hungarians and buy some of the nicer Hungarian goods. This was mostly food staples that were absent in Romania but also some luxuries if their money permitted, such as cola (which would be bought out to impress friends) or clothes (to smuggle more of these back into Romania people would wear old clothes on the way to Hungary and then discard them once purchasing nicer clothes in Hungary)

    Romania was after WW2, originally or supposed but never implemented (can't remember which), to be called Rominia to minimise the Latin element of Romanian identity.

    The Latin identity of Romania meant Ceasescu looked for close relations with other 'Latin' countries like France and Italy (He met De Gaulle in 1968 when protests in France i think? Im not sure on that)

    When the Ceausescu's were invited to sleep at Queen of Englands residence, Ceausescu's wife reportedly stole stuff

  13. The Following User Says Thank You to ridethejetski For This Useful Post:


  14. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,002
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    It's funny that people say that he was a "Stalinist". He was far from a Marxist-Leninist and actually advocated a national road to communism, but to a lesser extent than Tito.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to Vyacheslav Brolotov For This Useful Post:


  16. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    34
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I would like to thank you for sharing this great resource!
    Wir haben gelernt, dass Reden ohne Handeln unrecht ist. Und so was will Revolution machen!

  17. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    69
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Comrade Commistar View Post
    It's funny that people say that he was a "Stalinist". He was far from a Marxist-Leninist and actually advocated a national road to communism, but to a lesser extent than Tito.
    You know full well why he is a called a Stalinist (e.g. great overreach and power of secret police and internal security forces, minimal allowance of internal dissent ,large focus on industrialising the single country, focus on single leader). In terms of actual internal policies he had little in common with Tito. In terms of popular usage of the word 'stalinist', which doesn't care for your nerdy little fetish of the archaic theories of Stalin, he fits the word - although i would agree it offers no useful description of the Ceausescu regime.

  18. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to ridethejetski For This Useful Post:


  19. #12
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,467
    Organisation
    Illuminati
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    I expected not to be able to get through it cuz it would be boring, but I had trouble getting through because of how harrowing and anti-social the whole thing is. What a callous, heartless, little coward.

  20. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,002
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ridethejetski View Post
    You know full well why he is a called a Stalinist (e.g. great overreach and power of secret police and internal security forces, minimal allowance of internal dissent ,large focus on industrialising the single country, focus on single leader). In terms of actual internal policies he had little in common with Tito. In terms of popular usage of the word 'stalinist', which doesn't care for your nerdy little fetish of the archaic theories of Stalin, he fits the word - although i would agree it offers no useful description of the Ceausescu regime.
    That's cute. I was pointing out fact, I don't care about the fucking popular usage of the word.

  21. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Vyacheslav Brolotov For This Useful Post:


  22. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    69
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    You just wanted to show how you're the real Stalinist with Marxism-Leninism burning in your heart.

  23. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ridethejetski For This Useful Post:


  24. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    275
    Rep Power
    12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Negative Creep View Post
    What do you mean?
    I mean he literally took women's babies & orphans, and used them as tools of propaganda to praise his personality cult.

    Another fun fact is his "Palace of the Parliament" (or ironically nicknamed, 'the People's House'). It's the largest civilian building in the world, among other things:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palace_of_the_Parliament

    Also, apparently the shoots at the end where he's going through the bakery and food stores consisted of plastic props. Food was very scarce, but he wanted to make an impression to outsiders (as he was known as the 'friendly communist against the USSR' to capitalist nations).
    [FONT=Arial Narrow]"Body tissue deprived of life energy turns cancerous. Cancer is the hysteria of cells condemned to death. Cancer and fascism are closely related. Fascism is the frenzy of sexual cripples. The swastika owes its magnetism to being a symbol of two bodies locked in genital embrace. It all stems from a longing for love. Comrades, make love joyously and without fear."

    [/FONT][FONT=Tahoma]Khrushchev: "Its interesting, isnt it? Im of working class origin while your family were landlords."
    Zhou: "Yes, and we each betrayed our class!"[/FONT]

  25. The Following User Says Thank You to Robespierres Neck For This Useful Post:


  26. #16
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    3,617
    Rep Power
    64

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ridethejetski View Post
    You know full well why he is a called a Stalinist (e.g. great overreach and power of secret police and internal security forces, minimal allowance of internal dissent ,large focus on industrialising the single country, focus on single leader).
    And you know full well why some wouldn't call him a Stalinist.
    Political repression =/= Stalinism. Calling every state which had a red flag and something you don't like Stalinist makes for shitty analyses.

    Quote Originally Posted by ridethejetski View Post
    In terms of actual internal policies he had little in common with Tito. In terms of popular usage of the word 'stalinist', which doesn't care for your nerdy little fetish of the archaic theories of Stalin, he fits the word
    You do realize that most people would just call him a communist.

    Quote Originally Posted by ridethejetski View Post
    although i would agree it offers no useful description of the Ceausescu regime.
    Then why???
    How in the hell could a man enjoy being awakened at 6:30 a.m. by an alarm clock, leap out of bed, dress, force-feed, shit, piss, brush teeth and hair, and fight traffic to get to a place where essentially you made lots of money for somebody else and were asked to be grateful for the opportunity to do so? Charles Bukowski, Factotum
    "In our glorious fight for civil rights, we must guard against being fooled by false slogans, as 'right-to-work.' It provides no 'rights' and no 'works.' Its purpose is to destroy labor unions and the freedom of collective bargaining... We demand this fraud be stopped." MLK
    -fka Redbrother

  27. The Following User Says Thank You to Ocean Seal For This Useful Post:


  28. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    356
    Rep Power
    9

    Default

    Also, Romanian pollution.

  29. #18
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    15
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    If Ceausescu was so bad, how come that 41% of Romanian would want him back?
    Google because I can't post links.

    The most incredible result was registered in a July 2010 IRES (Romanian Institute for Evaluation and Strategy) poll, according to which 41% of the respondents would have voted for Ceausescu, had he run for the position of president.

  30. #19
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    15
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Also, Romanian pollution.
    How was it different from Hungarian or Bulgarian or any other pollution?

  31. The Following User Says Thank You to Communix For This Useful Post:


  32. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    1,002
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Communix View Post
    If Ceausescu was so bad, how come that 41% of Romanian would want him back?
    Google because I can't post links.

    The most incredible result was registered in a July 2010 IRES (Romanian Institute for Evaluation and Strategy) poll, according to which 41% of the respondents would have voted for Ceausescu, had he run for the position of president.
    Too bad being a better leader than some stupid leaders now does not make you a good Marxist-Leninist.

  33. The Following User Says Thank You to Vyacheslav Brolotov For This Useful Post:


Similar Threads

  1. Ceaușescu and Abortion
    By Red Future in forum History
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 14th April 2011, 15:37

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •