Cav's Place

The week began with three anti-fracking activists finally being granted, on May 19, the audience requested on January 21 and meeting a team of four representatives of the Romanian branch of the European Commission. The independent reporters who meant to join them were not allowed inside and the activists themselves were asked not to reveal what they were told, so they limited themselves to stating that the meeting lasted over two hours and the representatives seemed receptive on a personal level, but it’s quite clear that their hands are tied when it comes to actually doing something about the situation in Pungesti. Still, the posts I saw seemed to indicate that the talks were considered somewhat encouraging, at least on some level, and in the end the very fact that this meeting took place at all is a positive development.

Still on the matter of fracking, at least as far as their operations in Romania are concerned, a small number of activists marked the International Anti-Chevron Day, on May 21, first by posting materials informing people of the practices and crimes the company is guilty of around the world in 30 bus stops and then by staging a flash mob in front of the University Square fountain. Once again, I was not aware of any of it until after the fact, but it’s still a good thing that something happened in Bucharest after all, though the same unfortunately can’t be said about the May 24 March Against Monsanto, seeing as, as far as I know, Cluj was the only city in Romania to observe it this year.

Otherwise, also on May 21, a debate about the role of visual design in social activism was held, while some activists also mentioned the event meant to promote cycling among businesspeople and office workers, which took place the following day. This involved a “parade on bicycles”, the participants being asked to wear office clothes, which was followed by a “session of speeches and networking”. The week ended, or at least I definitely wish it would have ended, with a call for those willing to donate goods to the victims of the floods in Serbia and Bosnia to deliver them to the University Square fountain Sunday evening, starting at 5 PM, as a small number of activists were waiting to gather all donations and transport everything to the respective embassies later that evening.

Unfortunately, I can’t end this post now because I guess I also need to mention this idiotic campaign to boycott the European elections, whether by not voting at all or by casting an invalid vote, that most known activists and many regular protesters embarked on. A few did make efforts in the opposite, and correct, direction, gathering information about candidates and contacting them, including those from small parties or running as independents, to see which would be willing to pledge to support some of the causes we’re fighting for, and which ones have in fact supported us in the past as well, but those who did this were usually people associated with but not exactly directly part of this movement. Worse, even in these cases there were odd situations where the official stance of a group was to encourage people to vote for one of the parties whose leading candidates seemed acceptable as a result of their analysis, but some of the known activists leading it stated repeatedly that they personally will not vote, or will cast an invalid vote.
Obviously, even the defaced campaign posters, banners and tents were used to promote not voting, at least by some, and likely even more so during this last week of the campaign. They were fixed on the idea that this way they’ll send a strong message to the politicians that the electoral law needs changing and new alternatives must be encouraged, even though the only thing they did was prove to those in power that the system is working perfectly and they don’t even need to do anything to get rid of the supposedly informed, interested and intelligent people, so those who may be harder to trick, manipulate or simply buy off, because they take themselves out of the equation well enough if simply left to their own devices. Plenty of regular people who took part in the protests so far complained, and I obviously was one of the most vehement ones, but everything, at best, fell on deaf ears, and often enough it was seen as a sign that their strategy was working and we were accused of trying to push the agenda of the major parties which, for some reason I can’t fathom, were “clearly” panicking because of this.
A serious discussion should have taken place on May 19, when TVR, which is the state-owned television station, broadcasted a debate on whether or not people should still vote, a few known activists and journalists who agreed with the boycott being among the participants. Unfortunately, that turned into a complete mess, in part because six of the ten participants were in favor of the boycott and the remaining four, while apparently highly educated individuals who held respectable positions, seemed almost completely clueless, and in part because, after a brief presentation of the arguments against voting, everything turned into a shouting match filled with personal attacks that had nothing to do with the matter at hand and which the moderators didn’t seem to care to stop. Under these circumstances, the debate organized by the activists themselves, on May 23, might have been more interesting if I’d have believed that they were in any way interested in debating, but knowing that they were simply going to keep saying that the boycott is a brilliant idea while completely rejecting any and all arguments against it, I didn’t bother, so all I know is that about a dozen people seemed visible in a couple of pictures I happened to see.
In the end, people were called to “vote in the street” on election day and maybe about 100 attended the event taking place in front of the Bucharest National Theater, starting at 5 PM. Apparently the debates began around 6 PM and ended after 8 PM, but it was largely a matter of activists talking to each other and admitting, if they were asked, that the event itself was a failure. However, they continued to say that the campaign as a whole was a success, and they stressed that even more over the course of the following days, after the results were announced and it was revealed that close to 6% of the total number of votes were invalid.
In other words, both before and after the elections, activists bragged about reducing even that small number of votes that small parties and independent candidates could hope to obtain and therefore increasing the percentages of those they claim to be fighting against even further instead of causing a shock and sending a real message by helping a small party take one or two seats away from the major ones. As such, I do believe that “congratulations” are in order for the “United We Save” movement… They divided us, destroyed what we had created together, and kicked away a chance we won’t have again at least until the 2016 local and parliamentary elections, seeing as this year’s presidential ones obviously can’t possibly bring a success for us.