One of the immanent features of democracy as a systemic form is the participation of citizens in the exercise of power. By definition democracy means "governments of the people."In the strategy of typical democracy that we are dealing with in the modern world, citizens' participation in power is done through their elected representatives in free elections.In a democratic state, at least in principle, decisions are made according to the will of the majority, and electoral verdicts should be respected by the authorities. Unfortunately, in modern liberal-type democracies, these rules are more and more common only in theory.
A classical example of this is the fresh presidential election in Romaniain which the independent candidate has won Calin Georgescu, with a consequence of 22,94 % of the votes. Thus Georgescu moved on to the 2nd circular of elections in which he faced Elena Lasconi, representing the Liberal and pro-European Salvation Union of Romania. On the another hand, the erstwhile favourite polls – Prime Minister Marcel Ciolacu – did not go to the second round. The election consequence of Calina Georgescu was a large surprise as the candidate was not associated with any crucial political force in Romania. At the same time, the democratic verdict of election voters almost immediately began to be questioned. The reason for these actions was the fact that the views of the election winner were completely different from the political communicative governing the Romanian establishment. Among another things, Calin Georgescu criticized Romania's membership of NATO, opposed Ukraine's support in the war with Russia and opposed the ideology of globalism. It was adequate to be considered a persona non grata in Romanian politics. 2 days before the second circular of elections, they were annulled by the Constitutional Court. The authoritative reason for specified a decision was the alleged impact of external factors on the result of the elections, but no evidence was presented to this effect. It was only found that during the election run there were "Russian hybrid attacks". This apparent manipulation resulted in effects different from those assumed, making support for Calin Georgescu begin to grow. The mainstream reaction did not take long. On 26 February this year, Calin Georgescu was detained, and this followed erstwhile he was on his way to registry his candidacy in the repeated presidential election. The detention of Geoegescu took place under the pretext of illegally financing its run and actions against public order. The politician was besides accused of promoting the ideology of Fascism, which was related to his affirmative assessment of specified characters as Ion Antonescu and Cornelius Codreanu. It is worth noting that more than forty of his coworkers were searched during the arrest of Calin Georgesc. This is what political standards in a formally democratic state, which is simply a associate of the European Union and NATO, are in practice, but the decision centre in this case did not should be in Romania.
On the occasion of the annulment of the elections in Romania, akin events took place in 1991 in Algeria. At the time, the muslim Front of Salvation was victorious in the parliamentary elections, with about 47% of the vote. At that time, elections were canceled at the initiative of the army, resulting in more than 10 years of civilian war. These 2 events seem to have no connection, but only seemingly, due to the fact that there has been apparent manipulation in both cases, by questioning the democratic verdict of voters. This concludes that political standards in “democratic” Romania are akin to those in postcolonial Algeria more than 30 years ago. And in both cases, a group holding power by losing a chess game, scattered pawns on a chessboard to prevent opponents from winning.
In any circles, the slogan is "there is no democracy for the enemies of democracy". The problem is that these environments consider themselves solely entitled to justice what democracy is and who is the enemy of democracy. If there is simply a triumph in the election by the forces protesting a rigid system, or political agreement, then the threat of democracy to the utmost right, fascists, populists, etc. begins. An example of this was the reaction to the electoral successes of parties opposed to the inventions of liberal democracy, specified as: an alternate to Germany, the National Unity in France, the Austrian Free Party, or the Dutch Freedom Party. This besides applies to Poland, in which well-known environments recognise, for example, the Confederation and Eurosceptic and Anti-globalist environments as a threat to democracy. Previously, this active Self-defense, or the already forgotten organization of X Stanisław Tymiński. Interestingly, forces seeking to end the war in Ukraine are besides a threat to democracy. So democracy is to be for “its” only, and the remainder of the planet is subject to completely different rules. And it doesn't truly substance that specified actions distort the very essence of democracy, making us deal with its parody. After all, for any – if the explanation disagrees with the facts, the worse for the facts.
Michał Radzikowski
