Ep. 5 Free Speech: Burden of Truth BONUS

Taye shares the outtakes of her conversations with Romeo as he shares what it was like under Cheausescu's regime in Romania before the fall of communism. We confront the sides of communism and his personal projections of our American two party system, the burdens of proof and truth and the future of Trumpism after the insurrection on Jan 6.

Full Transcript

Taye 0:11

I'm Taye Mohler and this is Anatomy of Change a podcast series about the struggle and connection in making courageous change, in the systems and structures that thread our lives.

On this bonus episode, I share the outtakes of my conversation with Romeo, as he shares his experience under Cheausescu's regime before the fall. The sides of communism, and his personal projections of what may happen to our American two party system, and the future of Trumpism.

When I travel, I find some of the most interesting people to strike up a conversation with is taxi drivers to get the latest or the history of government and politics. It was no different when I was traveling in Bucharest, I found myself intrigued about the stories of secret police, disappearances and government officials tied to Ceausescu. On December 17 of 1989, he ordered military forces to open fire on demonstrators, causing deaths and injuries. When it became known that he was responsible for the order, civil unrest and rioting grew across Romania, and reached Bucharest. This period is known as the Romanian revolution. He tried to flee with his wife, Elena, and was captured, tried and convicted of economic sabotage and genocide. They were executed by firing squad on December 25, 1989. And so, at the end of one of our conversations, I wanted to ask Romeo more about what he could remember about Ceausescu's regime.

Romeo 2:11

These communist regimes, they always had, I don't know how to translate this, it was called nomenklatura, this would be a top tier of unelected officials really, that had advantages that weren't enjoyed by anyone else in society. Some of them were only associated loosely by family ties, or, you know, whatever. So, so one of the propaganda concepts that was sold to the people, there is a sentence straight out of the Communist Manifesto, to everybody according to their needs, from everybody according to their abilities. In other words, everybody was expected to contribute, and everybody would be taken care of. So that was the concept of equality. And it removes the incentive of people to do good for themselves, obviously.

This leveler was only applied to normal people, the last five years of communism, some time from like, 1984, all the way to 89. I don't know if you ever heard about this, but there was extreme shortages of basic foods, people would go to a grocery store, which again, government or government operated right grocery store would open, like at seven or 8am. And you never knew what there would be in stock. So people would go in line at 3am at night, and they would start lining up in a queue hoping they would have some things such as sugar or oil or eggs in stock, and hoping that, you know, they come early enough, they would get some, but it was never enough. And then they would open at 7-8am. And they would say no, we have nothing go home, and you would come back the next day and the next day, and maybe maybe you would be able to buy something once a week or once every two weeks. That is how bad it was. This top tier of people that I'm talking about, they had their separate stores that you know, they had memberships in and they would go there and they would be able to buy anything they wanted and there was no shortage of products for them.

You know, I also have to show you the other side of this because, you know, we talked about communist regimes and the problem of that system and dictatorships and just the the bads that came with it right? But there was also good that came out of it and this is part of that philosophy that I have that people have to see both sides of an argument and you have to be exposed to the truth from across the spectrum. Romania under communism developed a lot in the pursuit of that equality Ceausescu, which ruled the country for about 25 years, he started huge industrialization projects. And he literally took the country from being an agrarian country like it was agriculture was pretty much everything that we had became a powerhouse in the east. And I know maybe that doesn't mean anything or not doesn't mean much to someone from the west. But back then there was the Eastern Bloc, and then there was the Western Bloc, right?, so there was the Iron Curtain where there wasn't that much trade between the East and the West, but between the East countries, you know, members of the Eastern Bloc, there was a lot of trade, and some countries were better off and others less well off. So Romania became actually an economic powerhouse in the Eastern Bloc. And it was something that chaussures could develop single handedly, in the sense that he created policies that made that happen. And huge industrialization project, when he came to power, more than half the country had no electricity, just so you know, then they developed education.

This way, the system was much more equalitarian, than anything in the West. So if you are a sharp guy, or girl, and you are interested in bettering yourself, and you wanted to study, you had no obstacles to doing so. The SAS system would try as you and they had programs to basically identify people that had abilities, and they would be fast tracked through education and, you know, put under more advanced programs, and, and all of that, right? - and I benefited from that. And even though my father had the political past that he did, so my father had a very bad stigma, you know, on his life, you can say it didn't affect me, not only was University free, but even things like student housing was free, she wanted to apply yourself because, not everybody did, you know, like I said, the system didn't really encourage that later in life, because it was very equalitarian like that. But you know, for kids and for education, it was, I would argue it was an extraordinary system.

Taye 7:34

Some of our earlier discussion about trust in government, I left here during communism, as people were suffering severe repression and abuses, there was on the contrary, a high sense of Romanian pride, nationalism, it struck me that Trumpism was tapping into an American first nationalist agenda, and also playing as a unifier of discontent to a segment of people that began to use the label patriots, but stopped short on unifying for things like wearing a mask, to protect the spread of COVID-19.

Romeo 8:15

The aim of this propaganda was to make everyone feel like they had a stake in that society, and in that country, and nationalism is a part of that. So when you feel that you do have a stake, and you're part of a larger construct is not just you, right, then you feel more inclined to work for the better good, which is what the societies they what they try to do, or what they claim that they wanted to do, right. So there was no economic incentive for people to do that. They cultivated a sense of nationalistic identity and have a sense of belonging to the nation. And that actually helped the regime with their cause to industrialize and develop the country cases where people worked on some huge projects, but it was a pride to actually have an opportunity to work on a project like that.

Taye 9:14

The next topic strikes close to home, I have family that hold dear that don't tread on me flag. But after seeing it on January 6, and on rewind, in the days after the attack on the Capitol, I have this gut feeling of unease about how some are making meaning. So I asked the question that was on my mind with Romeo. I'm gonna sound maybe a bit to the edge here. But when I look at the Don't Tread on Me flags, I almost look at it like it's like flying something leading to a Nazi flag. Now, because of how it was used, and I know that may really upset people?

Romeo 10:01

Well, I'm glad you mentioned the Gadsden flag, actually, because that's where my answer would be. I mean, where do we start, we start by not demonizing our political opponents and not painting them with the same brush, because they are not all the same. And that certainly applies to the Gadsden flag, you know, the Don't Tread on Me. Actually, it is incorrect to take a symbol that is used by whatever, you know, extremist organization, and assign it only that meaning. Because this flag has been used, you know, by the libertarian movement in the United States, and it has been used even by the American Tea Party movement. So are those extremists too?

Taye 11:04

In our conversation taped after January 6, Romeo shared his predictions about the future of the Republican Party, and the two party system, as an outsider looking in, it looks even more fractured if we compare the divides and support between the personas of Liz Cheney and Marjorie Taylor Greene.

Romeo 11:25

I truly believe there will be some fracturing of political parties, but not in the right way. For me, good fracturing would be when the parts of these two parties that are reasonable and willing to work together and ultimately willing to improve society and, you know, America as a whole, they would come together and they will form a third party. But that's not what's gonna happen. Politics are driven by political gain. At the moment, the political gain, the winds have blown towards the Democratic Party, no Democratic Representative, you know, Senator in their right mind is going to move away from this situation that they have right now, where they control the Presidency, the House and the Senate. I do not see them reaching across the aisle in the next four years, because there is no incentive for them to do so. On the other hand, what I think Trump is going to splinter the Republican Party into a faction that would be like, you know, it will continue to follow Trumpism as an ideology, right? Then there will be another part of the republican party that will disassociate from from that movement. That's not going to play to the advantage of the Republican Party, but it is going to play to the advantage of the Democratic Party thus removing even more of that incentive for change. That is my my forecast.

Taye 13:04

But I think there's ebbs and pulls in the Democratic Party, because even within the party, you have push and pull of old and new between the young talent coming in the progressive wing...

Romeo 13:19

The progressive wing, might be able to drive some change. But they will drive it within that party. That is one area where I have to agree with the comments by Nancy Pelosi, you know that she, I think they were taken out of context and misrepresented. But at one point, she said you have to push for the change, you can achieve, not necessarily the change, you'd want to see. So, that is the essence of working, working together.

Taye 13:58

So for that give here was a get. Romeo called out propaganda on display in the days just after January 6. You may recall media invited to air public arrests, present Vice President Pence and Leader Nancy Pelosi greeting and showing support in front of a line of soldiers at the Capitol. You may have also heard the public announcement, that Nancy Pelosi was going to meet with the Joint Chiefs to ensure measures to protect process and decisions requested by the President in his final days. This may have seemed reasonable, given the unusual and potentially destructive consequences But zooming out?, What did it say to the world?

Romeo 14:39

But it's not the case right now. But imagine the scenario for a moment. Let's say that America had a powerful enemy. Imagine for a moment we're 40 years back in the cold war and nuclear missiles pointed to America from the Soviet Union. You know, with 1000s of of warheads, and imagine that they had made the decision that they were going to attack America and they were just waiting for the right moment to do so. A statement like that could totally trigger that decision from from an enemy that is bent on destructing you.

Taye 15:21

I share this final byte with you from Romeo. It's certainly made me uncomfortable hearing it. The label has been polarizing and political rhetoric leading into the elections. It may be a bridge too far. But he was authentic and his alarm you are about to hear. And given our conversation, it may already be amplified somewhere in the echo chambers. Is there anything that just pops out at you now?

Romeo 15:49

What jumps out at me right now is that it's almost like we have started leaving or going towards a fascist state. So a fascist state is one that controls you know, the lives and minds of their citizens, not directly through application of power. This is the main difference in in totalitarian systems between communism and fascism. In communism, you do not have free enterprise, and you do not have corporations, and you have the state that's applying and controlling the lives of everyone directly. But in fascism, you know, like Nazi Germany, you know, Mussolini, Italy, you know, states like that, in fascism, what you have, you still have free enterprise, but it's subordinate to the interests of the state, and it acts as a conduit for, for the state and, you know, for governments to, to drive their agendas, and you know, to control ultimately, their societies.

Taye 16:49

And so to unpack that, we talked about what we might be missing. And this is a big IF, because you and I don't know this, but if there is evidence that leading up to January 6, that there was corroboration, then he could be indicted. Are they looking at this as a terrorist act of incitement. And so therefore, this is what we do, shaming in the public square, public arrests, and, you know, basically removing the platform's.

Romeo 16:55

What you said about, you know, possible evidence and the impeachment process and potential trial in the Senate. All that holds true, and we will see how that plays out. Big Tech has made a decision to link an unresolved legal question to actions they took actively

Taye 17:48

I wonder. But I wonder, is there something that where it's a counterterrorism movement, now, you may look at that, as political, you may look at it is the Big Tech bending

Romeo 18:01

And if they did, then that is the definition of the fascist state that I said earlier about corporations in a free society do not bend to the will of the state, they bend to the laws.

Taye 18:16

But what about that hard line we were talking about?

Romeo 18:19

Cannot draw an analogy between a President and a far right, domestic terrorist type of person like that. I'm not sure you can use this equivalence. The President of the United States is an office and a role that has power and has controls. The burden of proof for somebody holding the Office of the President, there should be something that is unequivocal, because if not, then you open the door to this type of

Taye 18:54

more revolution and rebellion

Romeo 18:56

revolution brewing.

Audio of mob at Capitol on Jan 6

Taye 19:36

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell after the impeachment vote...

Audio of Mitch McConnell 19:41

Fellow Americans beat and bloodied our own police. They stormed the senate floor they tried to hunt down the Speaker of the House. They built a gallows and chanted about murdering the Vice President. They did this because they'd been fed wild falsehoods by the most powerful man on earth because he was angry he lost an election. Former President Trump's actions preceded the riot for a disgraceful, disgraceful dereliction of duty. There's no question none. That President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day. No question about it. The people who stormed this building believed they were acting on the wishes and instructions of their President. And having that belief was a foreseeable consequence of the growing crescendo of false statements, conspiracy theories and reckless hyperbole, which the defeated president kept shouting into the largest megaphone on planet Earth.

Preview 21:37

Next time on Anatomy of Change, we're going to leave "Free Speech" and give it space to marinate for a while, and move to a new chapter called "The Choice". The debate circles human rights, reproductive health and rights from the unborn to girls, women and LGBTQ. The stories and perspectives on both sides wrestle with topics that will strike the rough edge of debate. Will we find connection of freedom of speech to freedom of the choice?

Credits 22:16

Anatomy of Change is executive produced by Taye Mohler with post production editing and mixing by James Fleege. Special thanks to Romeo, TM and AT. This episode contains an audio clip provided by C-Span. The original series music titled Reborn was composed by Adrian Berenguer. Additional music featured in this episode by Kadir Demir, The David Roy Collective, Philip Daniel, Roza and James Fleege. Our website where you can listen to all episodes music and artists featured and find companion content is Anatomy of Change.org.