Acest site utilizează fișiere de tip cookie pentru a vă oferi o experiență cât mai plăcută și personalizată. Îți aducem la cunoștință faptul că ne-am actualizat politicile pentru a ne conforma cu modificările propuse aduse de Directiva (UE) 2002/58/EC ("Directiva E-Privacy") si de Regulamentul (UE) 2016/679 privind protectia persoanelor fizice in ceea ce priveste prelucrarea datelor cu caracter personal si privind libera circulatie a acestor date si de abrogare a Directivei 95/46/CE ("Regulamentul GDPR").
Înainte de a continua navigarea pe www.jurnalul.ro, te rugăm să citești și să înțelegi conținutul Politicii de Cookie și Politica de Confidențialitate.
Prin continuarea navigării pe www.jurnalul.ro confirmi acceptarea utilizării fișierelor de tip cookie. Poți modifica în orice moment setările acestor fișiere cookie urmând instrucțiunile din Politica de Cookie.
The Romanian Baobab
By DORIN TUDORAN - January 21st 2005This is the title of one of my editorials, which I published three years ago. It read: "The time of the doctrinarian trees seems to have disappeared in Romania. The ideological cacophony appeared instead.
The results of the parliamentary and presidential elections in 2004 bring again into discussion the NLP (National Liberal Party) - DP (Democratic Party) merger. It is not determined by any doctrinarian similitude, but by complicated governing problems. There cannot be any similitude between the party of Bratianu (the fonder of NLP) and the branch torn out from FNS/DSPR (Front of the National Salvation/Democratic Socialist Party in Romania) by Mr. Petre Roman. Moreover, after 1989, Mr. Basescu and some other former members of FNS, DSPR, SDP (Social Democratic Party) built most of their political and doctrinarian identity also basing on the most important historical party of Romania. They form a left-oriented group of politicians that are yet to put a wall between them and the RCP (Romanian Communist Party), in the same way in which many of the people are yet to put a wall between them and the monkey race.
On the other side, a liberal right-oriented side that, for a while, was out of the after-1989 parliamentary circuit due to Mr. Radu Campeanuâs political foolish measures. In order to be one of the governing parties, the liberals should have settled with the alliance with the FNS - SDPR chip, which Mr. Basescu took over from Mr. Roman, only. They didnât quite do that. In order to do it at least temporary, they co-opted the HPR (Humanist Party in Romania). This is a party that the liberals, as well as the democrats, profoundly despise, but only Mr. Basescu has the pleasure of publicly stating this.
There should be some other mergers. From the doctrinarian point of view, DP is much closer to SDP than to NLP. The leavings of Mr. Roman and Mr. Basescu didnât occur due to any doctrinarian divergences between them and the ones that remained, but to some personal interests. Since SDP is in trouble, and Mr. Basescu proved to be a skilful demolisher, it would be normal for the politician he is today (chief of the state, Prime Minister, general mayor of Bucharest and DPâs president) to force a take over of the SDP. This way, the left-oriented poll would logically strengthen.
Who could the NLP build the right-oriented poll with? Mr. Ciuhandu rose a hand, but, being part of the political power, the liberals didnât see him. This is because the NPCDP (National Peasant Christian Democratic Party), due to some people like Diaconescu, Galbeni, Lupu and Ciorbea, is in the same place where the NLP were when Mr. Campeanu led them. Then there will be some people saying that NLP and NPP were not only historical parties of Romania, but historical adversaries as well. It is true, but they had a common enemy, that also got them out of the political scenery moving them into prisons - RCP, the legitimate and spiritual father of the frisky FNS/SDPR and DP.
The name that some people see as being appropriate for the new party born from the doctrinarian antithesis between NLP and DP is the Liberal Democratic Party or the Democratic Liberal Party. What would be the opposition of the first one, from the "doctrinarian" point of view? Well, probably the Liberal Undemocratic Party, right? The answer for the second case would probably be the Democratic Illiberal Party, right? The discussion with the Popular Party was only one smile away. It belonged to Mr. Valeriu Stoica.
Whatâs funny is that the merger, which wonât happen due to reasons of doctrinarian similitude, will continue to hit the so bantered HPR. What initially was the Humanist Party in Romania also became "social - liberal", which made many of the members of NPCDP, SDP and NLP laugh. Only that life shows us that not only immorality and identity crisis are at hand for everyone, but the doctrinarian artificial hybridization as well.
There will be many parties that, wishing to have the power impossible to get as a result of the elections, will continue to merge. However, this wonât happen according to the doctrinarian appropriations, but, funny, in the virtue of the doctrinarian antithesis. We are yet to see the strength of such political constructions. And their costs too.
Translation: SORIN BALAN