How did the cult of personality of Ceaușescu collapsed?

Taken from wikipedia:

"By the late 1980s, the Communist Party—and indeed, nearly all other institutions in Romania—had become completely subordinated to Ceaușescu's will. This was in contrast to the situation in other Communist countries. Most ruling Communist Party leaders were merely first among equals, even with the great power that came with their posts. Although Ceaușescu was a national Communist, his absolute control over the country and the pervasiveness of the cult led several non-Romanian observers to describe his regime as one of the closest things to an old-style Stalinist regime."

Ceausescu was seen as one of the most popular and strong leaders of the Warsaw pact during the 1970s and 1980s, to the point that expressing views against him would make not only his authorities persecute you, but also the common people.

A (rather large pic) of a Ceausescu Rally in 1978
Propaganda_-_Cultul_personalitatii_-_B.jpg

This cult, as we know, collapsed in the late 1980s, and so I wanted to know how, and some possible sources about it.
 
There were a number of reasons, such as his forcing people to sign forms "requesting" their homes be demolished so they could be made to live in apartment blocks, his oppressive domestic security agency, and the like.

In the end it comes down to a simple truth. Kick a dog often enough, long enough, eventually it will rip your throat out.
 
Propaganda only works for so long when people's material conditions are deteriorating because you took them into austerity to pay back IMF loans.
 
He didn't have enough military support to retain control of his regime (he favoured the internal security forces over the military), and Romania happened to be very close to where communist regimes were collapsing left and right. Compare to Kim Jong-il, who even through the worst of North Korea's disasters in the 90s had full support of the KPA which helped the Songun policy develop. North Korea is particularly relevent to Ceausescu, given that Ceausescu praised Juche extensively and developed a similar hypernationalistic ideology, and also was attempting to pass power to his son as Kim Il-sung did (and his son Nicu Ceausescu was even more inept than Kim Jong-il, being an alcoholic prone to gambling who was associated with Saddam Hussein's sadistic son Uday Hussein). But North Korea was definitely in a better position than Romania was in the early 90s, hence why North Korea is a rogue nation and Romania is not, even though Romania had comparable hypernationalist rhetoric against neighbouring states, a nuclear program, etc.

Ceausescu's likely to be overthrown in any case, but he didn't have to die such a miserable death compared to other communist leaders. If he had the luck of the devil based on having done every thing "right" in the final decade of his rule, he might have some hope of turning Romania into the North Korea of Europe.
 
There's an interesting documentary on how Romania collapsed and how Ceausescu fell from power.


If Ceausescu made smarter decisions, he probably would have still held onto power. But the regime would have most certainly collapsed after his death, regardlessly of any alterations.
 
Last edited:
He didn't have enough military support to retain control of his regime (he favoured the internal security forces over the military), and Romania happened to be very close to where communist regimes were collapsing left and right. Compare to Kim Jong-il, who even through the worst of North Korea's disasters in the 90s had full support of the KPA which helped the Songun policy develop. North Korea is particularly relevent to Ceausescu, given that Ceausescu praised Juche extensively and developed a similar hypernationalistic ideology, and also was attempting to pass power to his son as Kim Il-sung did (and his son Nicu Ceausescu was even more inept than Kim Jong-il, being an alcoholic prone to gambling who was associated with Saddam Hussein's sadistic son Uday Hussein). But North Korea was definitely in a better position than Romania was in the early 90s, hence why North Korea is a rogue nation and Romania is not, even though Romania had comparable hypernationalist rhetoric against neighbouring states, a nuclear program, etc.

Ceausescu's likely to be overthrown in any case, but he didn't have to die such a miserable death compared to other communist leaders. If he had the luck of the devil based on having done every thing "right" in the final decade of his rule, he might have some hope of turning Romania into the North Korea of Europe.

The lack of military support of Ceausescu was a major factor when the Romanian Revolution did occur at first the military was on the side of the regime until defense minister Vasile Milea's (Who had already fallen out of favor with Ceausescu) death on December 22, 1989 (6 Days into the revolution) afterwards the rank-and-file members of the military (Believing that Milea was murdered under orders from Ceausescu) went en masse over to the revolution with the senior commanders writing Ceausescu off as a lost cause which at that point the Ceausescu regime was effectively done for.

The only thing that Ceausescu should have done to save his own ass would have been to immediately step down (And should hand it over to someone who likely starts phasing out communist rule in the country) before the revolution even occurs and beat it (Along with his entire family) out of Romania permanently (Hoping he's not forcibly brought back by extradition if the new government in Romania seeks criminal prosecution).

Even then Ceausescu's regime would have likely ending up finished for good anyway (Steps down under pressure, Military coup, Forcibly voted out by the State Council)
 
Last edited:
The only thing that Ceausescu should have done to save his own ass would have been to immediately step down (And should hand it over to someone who likely starts phasing out communist rule in the country) before the revolution even occurs and beat it (Along with his entire family) out of Romania permanently (Hoping he's not forcibly brought back by extradition if the new government in Romania seeks criminal prosecution).

Even then Ceausescu's regime would have likely ending up finished for good anyway (Steps down under pressure, Military coup, Forcibly voted out by the State Council)

Wonder if the monarchy could be restored under these circumstances? King Mihai would have been in his late 60s at the time.
 
Wonder if the monarchy could be restored under these circumstances? King Mihai would have been in his late 60s at the time.

It couldn't, because nobody wanted the monarchy back. People who fetishize stuff like this, restoring Tsarism post-91, etc. don't seem to take this pesky fact into account.
 
Last edited:
Wonder if the monarchy could be restored under these circumstances? King Mihai would have been in his late 60s at the time.

I don't think that any restoration of the monarchy would work (Even doubt that the Romanian people would even want it). What would have happened was who ever replaced Ceausescu should have immediately started to negotiate with the opposition and immediate initiate a dismantling of communist rule and a gradual reform of the whole economic infrastructure (The gradual reforms did actually happen having been completed at the turn of the century).
 

Zagan

Donor
It couldn't, because nobody wanted the monarchy back. People who fetishize stuff like this, restoring Tsarism post-91, etc. don't seem to take this pesky fact into account.
Nobody? Really? Seven million Romanians are nobody to you? Because, that was the high mark of monarchy support in Romania (cca. 35%). It would be difficult but not impossible to raise that figure over 50% in an ATL.
 
And there was another factor: the TV show Dallas (though it was a small one). Ceausescu decided to show the American TV show Dallas to the Romanians to show the excesses of the "capitalist West" to the Romanian people; it only caused the Romanian people to wonder why they couldn't have the lifestyles portrayed on the TV show (even the poor characters were considered wealthy by Romanian standards). In addition, he forced many Romanian families to have five children or more (causing much resentment); many "unwanted" children were subsequently put into abusive orphanges and generally helped contribute to his downfall. Also, he exported all of Romania's goods and ran up the debt, triggering resentment and hatred of him (there's a reason why hundreds of people volunteered to kill him and his wife)...
 
It couldn't, because nobody wanted the monarchy back. People who fetishize stuff like this, restoring Tsarism post-91, etc. don't seem to take this pesky fact into account.
Millions of Romanians did want it back though, and the government took steps to resist such an eventuality - same as in Bulgaria (and after attempts to restore the monarchy were blocked he went and got himself elected prime minister - though his administration's failures probably kiboshed any hope of a restoration).
 
Top