I received from Adi and Paul Wood (via Romania Economics) the following counter editorial from Academia Catavencu. The first paragraph is Paul's comment.
Nastase was voted for by the fools. Not by the fools protected by metaphors, but exactly those fools expressed dryly by the figurers: the fools without education, those who are inclined to skipping classes and those who gave up school since childhood, Catavencu's counter-editorial characterizes the Romanian elections.
"It is incredible but a tireless conspiracy of fools has played the same card for years and years, keeping in power a profitable combination of theft, pretense, hooliganism and Marxism. Out of the voters who haven't finished high school, 62% preferred Adi while out of those over 65, around 63% did the same thing. The rural area has, as usual, paid off massively: 59%. Therefore, we have ourselves again a map of masses that are easy to tame, uneducated, uninformed, a little nostalgic and a little stupid, but numerous and sensitive to state bribery. A mirror-like cynicism, the diluted twin of the Social Democratic Party (PSD)'s cynicism is making these Pavlovian crowds rise at a single sign and, as though under the influence of narcotics to place in the ballot boxes, inextricably, the same vote again and again."
Basescu has won. So half of the people are smart and educated? Impressive
I always thought of a basic exam to get the right to wote. Something very simple. As in knowing basic constitution principles, an easy intelligence test. I know it's not quite democratic but could prove to be a more adequate way.
Again, I would ask all the candidates for parlament to pass a basic test on constitution amendaments. Although I already miss senator Dolanescu and his esteemed colleagues
More about the dictatorship of the many (romanian)
I think it is very unfair to say that the only people who voted Năstase were fools! Năstase was a good PM from 2000-2004, whatever all of you may say. He boosted the economy, bought many people out of poverty, and bought Romania into NATO and then prepared for the EU, in the meantime forging an alliance with the USA. Yes, he had his flaws, but that doesn't mean he was a bad, bad man! He did his job well, better than many others could have done. Of course Băsescu was the better candidate, and will probably do better than Iliescu, but I can see the point-of-view of many Năstase voters. Firstly, they remembered with dread the days of Constaninescu. Secondly, they were pleased with Năstase's progress in economics and wanted him to end what he had started. That's a good reason. Thirdly, the thought Năstase was a better diplomat (which he is) and would therefore be better in external relations (Băsescu is a bit too uneducated in some aspects, and this will probably disadvantage Romania at some point, though his qualities will probably exceed his flaws). A lot of educated people could have preffered Năstase and had good reason to. In any case, I think we shouldn't be too hard on Năstase just because he is out of power now. He did a lot for Romania, yet he got voted out for good reason. That's the truth. It's disappointing seeing how people are putting it now that "Communism was overthrown in Romania" and "Those who voted for Năstase were either Communists or mindless rural fools".
About this paragraph: "Nastase was voted for by the fools. Not by the fools protected by metaphors, but exactly those fools expressed dryly by the figurers: the fools without education, those who are inclined to skipping classes and those who gave up school since childhood, Catavencu's counter-editorial characterizes the Romanian elections. " You must be very upset at PSD and its voters if you post such politically incorrect statements :)) I am sure you know that in every country in the world, less educated people vote either with social democrats or with candidates standing for "stability and continuity". Look at what happened in US; who voted Bush? Isn't impressive that the district of Columbia voted like 90% for Kerry? While the good old Americans who drive SUV's, own guns and eat hamburgers did just the opposite? And we should not forget that 45% of Romanians did not vote. Are all of them stupid? I am more inclined to believe that many can still remember the role of Basescu in undermining the CDR's governments between '96 and '00.
I have already mentioned it that it is a literally quote from Paul (the first paragraph) and Catavencu (the last). My opinion about who voted for Nastase is here.