Talk:Socialist Republic of Romania

Title is wrong

Romania was socialist, not communist. Communism was never achieved. KnowledgeKeeper161 (talk) 19:18, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Start a discussion at WP:RM if you object. — Biruitorul ^Talk 19:20, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 17 April 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not Moved, based chiefly on consistency with other similar states, and to avoid a POV slant to the title. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bensci54 (talk) 16:29, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

---

Socialist Republic of Romania → Socialist Romania – Here we are again. Two years ago I proposed a move to Communist Romania [1], which was unsuccessful. Many of the opposers focused on the appropriate use of Marxist terminology, as Romania did not achieve communism, which would imply if I am not mistaken an abolishment of the state, despite meeting the definition used at Communist state. Now that the page has been subject to some moves I think it is a good moment to revisit the alternative I proposed and which went largely undiscussed, Socialist Romania

This article deals with all of Romania's communist regime. During this time, Romania was known by two names, Romanian People's Republic (1947–1965) and Socialist Republic of Romania (1965–1989). The current title, using the last of the two names, leaves out 40% of this period. This is not based on any policy, convention or common practice. People's Socialist Republic of Albania uses the second out of three official names, which was used only half the time the first one was; Czechoslovak Socialist Republic also uses the second out of three official names, this time it is the one used for the longest. Most other Eastern Bloc states had only one official name throughout their history and are not valid comparisons. Per WP:OFFICIALNAMES we are not required to stick to official names and can resort to descriptive rather than proper names if there is good reason.

"Socialist Romania" gives 4,890 results in Google Scholar, while "Socialist Republic of Romania" gives 4,950 (and "Romanian People's Republic" gives 711). The proposed title is practically just as common (WP:COMMONNAME) as the current one. Worth noting that "Communist Romania" gives 12,700 results and is the most common name, but it is not the focus of this RM, because it was rejected on the last one.

Thus, "Socialist Romania", while not violating WP:OFFICIALNAMES and WP:COMMONNAME, is shorter than the current title (WP:CONCISE), actually covers the whole period (WP:PRECISE) and is seemingly in line with Marxist terminology. The choice of using the last official name is not based on any formal procedure (and is thus arbitrary by definition), and we are not pressed to keep it. For all of these reasons I believe the proposed title is a better alternative. By the way, this will be my last attempt at altering this article's title. Super Ψ Dro 20:11, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

• Support for the well-reasoned argumentation above, with a fall-back position in favor of Communist Romania as a second choice. — Biruitorul ^Talk 20:43, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

• Comment. Attempting to stay in line with the aforementioned Marxist terminology (no Communist Party-run country is ever truly communist) is a textbook example of falling in line with the No true Scotsman fallacy. Turgidson (talk) 21:14, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

  A core tenet of Communism is the abolishment of any private ownership of the means of production, which are turned into the community's property (hence the name, Communism). This was never fully implemented in Romania as far as I know, where small private businesses were allowed to thrive. Other than a few Western politicians and media, nobody in Romania at the time claimed that the country was Communist; not even its government. — kashmīrī ^TALK 14:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

  Yep, sure thing. By the same token, the Soviet Union was never Communist, nor is the Democratic People's Republic of Korea: they all are (or used to be) on the Shining Path towards les lendemains qui chantes. It's all a moving target, never falsifiable. The No true Scotsman fallacy lives on. Turgidson (talk) 14:18, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

  Well, maybe that's why we don't have country articles titled Communist Russia or Communist Korea. Agree that Communism served as the ideal that was to be marched to, and the fact that it wasn't there is one of the reason why we shouldn't name countries as "Communist" in Wikipedia voice. — kashmīrī ^TALK 18:06, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. WP:TITLECON with almost all other former socialist/communist states around that period. The current title works and is clear. Move is believed to be unnecessary. Cfls (talk) 23:50, 17 April 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose. Unless exceedingly common, we normally use official names of countries, and not a given government's ideology – see British Raj (not: Colonial India), Soviet Union (not: Communist Russia), etc. Besides, the term "Socialist Republic of Romania" is incomparably more popular[2] than "Socialist Romania". Finally, the proposed title is imprecise and can be considere misleading: socialism is neither an antithesis of free-market economy, which Romania began to implement since 1990, nor we can say that socialism ended in Romania on 10 December 1989, given that many EU countries embrace socialist policies even today (incl. democratic socialism, popular socialism, etc.). — kashmīrī ^TALK 13:48, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

This is starting to get ridiculous. We all know very well "communist"/"socialist" refer to the 1947–1989 regime in Romania. Let's stop playing around with words that have a very clear meaning for the vast majority of the population. I could understand it on the last RM but now? Really? Romania now is, quite obviously, not socialist. There is no imprecision, no misleading.

On the other hand, the Ngrams are a much more valid point. Super Ψ Dro 18:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

We all know very well "communist"/"socialist" refer to the 1947–1989 regime in Romania Wikipedia is not written for your or for me but for ordinary readers who will be looking for the country of that era whatever you think its system was. Google Trends show with no doubt what is the more common search term. And since that common search term happens to be the same as the official name of the country, the naming choice is obvious. — kashmīrī ^TALK 18:08, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

I was replying to Finally, the proposed title is imprecise and can be considere misleading: socialism is neither an antithesis of free-market economy, which Romania began to implement since 1990, nor we can say that socialism ended in Romania on 10 December 1989, given that many EU countries embrace socialist policies even today. Romania is not socialist today. The proposed title is not imprecise in that sense.

Also, per WP:COMMONNAME, "Communist Romania" has been the most popular option for the longest time [3]. Super Ψ Dro 20:40, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

You've done it wrong. Correct chart:[4] ("Communist Romania" should be a search term, not a topic). — kashmīrī ^TALK 00:12, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Comment as an uninvolved editor: @Kashmiri, your comparisons are very bad. British Raj (Hindi for British rule) is the modern-day common name of the period of crown rule in India as the opening sentence of the article itself says, not the country. It is about the period, rather than the country. The country was officially called "India" (see the infobox in the article) or "Indian Empire" (see passports, government maps, documents, etc.). The Soviet Union is the common name not the official name. The official name was the "Union of Soviet Socialist Republics" (USSR). "Soviet Union" had no legal force and was only a common name. PadFoot2008 (talk) 05:25, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. Sounds POV, and causes more problems that it solves. Don't know if it really was Socialist or not - I am sure many would prefer to describe as Communist or Soviet satellite or a Ceausescu dictatorship. Just as I am sure many could describe the current Romanian state as "socialist" as well (indeed, Art. 1 of its constitution explicitly identifies is "a social state"). I would rather not to engage in guessing games. And this "We all know..." kind of argumentation holds no water. The current name is preferable, and happens to also be WP:COMMONNAME. Walrasiad (talk) 03:46, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Let's decide about the title

@Super Dromaeosaurus, Biruitorul, StephenMacky1, KnowledgeKeeper161, Kashmiri, and Accipiter Gentilis Q.: & everyone else: hi! Salut!

The article now starts like this:

"The Socialist Republic of Romania ... existed officially in Romania from 1947 to 1989"

No it didn't. Blatantly wrong.

It was, however, a constituent part of the Communist block, along with Communist Bulgaria, Communist Hungary (1946-49 + 49-89), Communist Czechoslovakia, Communist Poland, Communist Germany, all under the control of Communist Russia; and to a certain degree along with Communist Albania and Communist Yugoslavia. Now, what do we notice?

Let's try something else: Socialist block, Socialist Bulgaria, Socialist Hungary, Socialist Czechoslovakia, Socialist Poland, Socialist Germany, Socialist Russia; Socialist Albania, Socialist Yugoslavia.

Now, what do we notice?

1. The topic here is Romania between Dec. 1947 and Dec. 1989. The title must necessarily reflect this, and not just a partial aspect (PRP 1947-1965 and/or RSR 1965-89).
2. Nobody pays any attention to Marxist-Leninist doctrine. Even those allegedly following it came up with the concept of real socialism. Selling plots of real estate on the Moon is not politology or encyclopedically relevant. Hitler also declared some remote idealistic goals; we're still entitled to call his state Nazi Germany. Dictatorial regimes don't get to impose their terminology outside their sphere of influence.
3. Most Communist block members (not Socialist block members) kept one name from the start of Soviet occupation at the end of WWII until recovering their freedom in 1989, when they quickly reverted to pre-WWII names or similar ones. And they all distanced themselves from - what? Socialism as a provisional step on the enlightened road of the proletariat... blabla, blabla? No, from Communism.
4. What term does cover both periods in Romania's Communist period? Hard to guess, right?
5. Does anyone care how the Party called itself? No. The Romanian Communist Party was just that, with obvious changes of ideology and political platform, along with its name - Partidul Comunist din România ("from Romania") as part of the Comintern; Partidul Muncitoresc Romîn ("Workers' Party", with "Slavic" î, 1948-1964) and P.M. Român (with "Latin" â, 1964-1965) when expedience required it; and Partidul Comunist Român after 65, when it started becoming more national-communist (or does anyone prefer national-socialist? Fine by me.) To everyone it was and stayed: the Romanian Communist Party, or the Romanian communist party, nobody gives a fuck here about caps or no caps.

Still anyone who disagrees calling the article "Communist Romania"?

Then the other minor revert in the lead: it wasn't just "officially" this & that, but in every possible way, both de jure AND the facto. So "officially" must be removed. Again, as illustration: fascist Italy wasn't just "officially" Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany wasn't just "officially" a Nazi state, and the "dictatorship of the proletariat" was not just an official doctrine, but a real dictatorship, only not of the proletariat, but of Stalin's.

OK, let's cut this BS. Enough of it. Arminden (talk) 21:28, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Two more important aspects re. Communist (!) block:

• Comecon
• Warsaw pact.

Before anyone starts fantasising about Ceauşescu's independence, unalignment and so forth.

I'm fine with a model similar to the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, where the last historical name of Communist Czechoslovakia is kept as the title of the article, but the change of official names is made more than visible from the very top of the lead on, and also graphically (separate, framed infoboxes with thick letters for each name). Arminden (talk) 21:45, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

Now, what do we notice? — We notice that virtually ALL these terms, be it "Communist X" or "Socialist X", are either REDIRECTS or DISAMBIGUATION PAGES. None serves as article title, certainly for a host of reasons. Not even the term "Communist block". See? — kashmīrī ^TALK 18:13, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Update

Informations needs to be updated. 2600:1006:B005:6B15:1979:658D:FDD6:5D5F (talk) 20:27, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Meaning what? tgeorgescu (talk) 20:45, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

State atheism

@Pizza1289: There was certainly state atheistic propaganda, but the Communist regime decided it is better to control religion than to prohibit it. tgeorgescu (talk) 14:52, 30 August 2024 (UTC)