This is going to be a long post full of lots of quotes. Just a warning.

Romania: “In the first years of the Communist regime, a previously unimaginable phenomenon in relation to the Gypsies showed itself: a relatively large number of Gypsies were employed in the Party apparatus, the militia, army and the security apparatus.”(1) However this also came along with the government making them stop being nomadic and settle in houses. A lot of times being forced into these better houses meant taking a primarily Roma community, demolishing it, and then dispersing them to various different neighborhoods. So it may seem fine, but that’s forced assimilation. It is one thing to be given the option for better housing and to have your house completely obliterated and forced to move. Especially since many of these demolished communities had been there for centuries, as a group. And families/”groups” is an extremely important value in Roma culture.

From my own knowledge of the groups of Roma in Romanian, many of them did suffer due to this forced assimilation. Many groups are looked down upon because they barely practice certain cultural norms or speak the language. The culture is so deeply intertwined with the racial identity of being Romani that to some other Roma, these groups are barely considered Romani at all. It also has to be said that Romania has some of the most wealthy Roma in certain parts of the country — primarily ones who made their money selling metal after the fall of Communism.

USSR: The USSR definitely has a fascinating history involving Gypsies. They were one of the first nations who forced nomadic Roma to become non-nomads, as many of the countries did. There were a lot of propaganda books written in the Roma language to teach Roma how to be proper citizens: such as suggesting Roma women give up fortune telling, that working in factories is best, etc.(2)

“Hundreds of Romani citizens themselves lobbied Moscow for a Soviet Gypsy homeland as a key to their integration into Soviet economic, social, and cultural life. In 1936, the chairman of the Soviet of Nationalities celebrated the anticipated creation of an Autonomous Gypsy Soviet Socialist Republic.”(3) Of course that never really came to be — nor am I really sure it would have ended well if it did happen — but this is one of the rare times in history a proposal like this was ever genuinely considered. A lot of the successful Roma in the USSR were farmers of land given to them by the Soviets. A lot of these farmers are those who ended up trying to propose the Autonomous Gypsy region. That is a pretty big deal because back then and nowadays, Roma really weren’t involved in politics. Ultimately the idea was thrown away and never allowed to happen. This was primarily scrapped because Soviets couldn’t fully embrace the idea it would be successful due to them believing Roma were inherently incapable of successful, sedentary lives and that it would be a waste of money. However, the fact it did come so close to reality is pretty astounding.

Hungary: “In 1987 the Hungary’s Communist government funded a genetic study of Gypsies that purported to prove that Gypsy ‘criminality’ is hereditary.” Hungary is by far one of the most cruelly antiziganist countries and this was true even under communism. “In Hungary in 1961 special measures were envisaged against the discrimination of Roma in Hungarian society, and the housing program of 1964 envisaged liquidation of 2.500 Roma separate settlements.”(4) Many ended up employed, but it did come with the price of being forced out of their communities and giving up many cultural practices.

Though it’s not like things were better after Communism in Hungary. “Since the fall of the communist regime the economic situation of Hungary's Romas has worsened dramatically. The unemployment rate among Hungary's Romas is now between 60 and 70 % of adult males and in some regions, the rate is between 80 and 100%.”(5) In this year alone, antiziganist marches were held. Hungary admitted to purposefully segregating Roma in education — and then the Prime Minister came out to disagree with the ruling by saying Roma kids are violent.

Yugoslavia: There is more to say, but overall, I feel Yugoslavia did pretty well. “The situation in Yugoslavia is a specific case. In an 1969 article, Slobodan Berberski — Rom and Communist functionary of long standing, political prisoner, resistance fighter from the WW2, member of the Central Committee of the Union of Yugoslav Communists — announced that Yugoslav Roma would create their own organization, which had the main aim to assist Roma to achieve the status of a “nationality.” In the 1970s over 60 Roma organizations existed and their number was constantly on the increase. Various initiatives, largely cultural events, were supported by the Yugoslav state; books were published in Romani, Roma TV and radio broadcasts began. In 1986 existing Roma associations united in a Union of Roma Associations in Yugoslavia.”(6)

Czechoslovakia: In Czechoslovakia, Roma were given allotted land for farming and some aspects of social support, under the Communist government, there was still extreme racism and forced assimilation. “As Communism came over to Czechoslovakia, a chilling ‘solution’ to the proliferation of the Roma came about: the uninformed and non-consenting sterilization of Roma women, often under the guise of caesarean sections and abortions, and under pressure from social workers who would get their uninformed consent with promises of cash and tangible goods.”(7) Half of the women who were sterilized in Czechoslovakia were Roma women.

Many children were stolen from their families and made to be raised and/or educated by non-Roma families. This happened (and still happens) a lot under non-Communist governments too. There were also proposals about making Ghettos for Roma specifically during these times. As well, there were limits on how many Roma could be in a specific place. “A planned programme for transferring Roma from overcrowded settlements in Slovakia and dispersing them to suitable locations in the Czech lands. A maximum permissible portion of Roma per community was set at 5%. As a Romani spokesman sardonically commented: ‘They planned the numbers for each village - horses, cows and Gypsies’.”(8)

Post-Communism was not good either. “Observers note a marked increase in hate crimes committed against Roma victims in central and Eastern Europe since the collapse of communism. Although the Roma have always been a socially and economically marginalized population in Eastern Europe, now more than ever Roma communities and neighborhoods are often found lacking in electricity and clean water.”(9)

Overall, I think it is important to look into history and see how certain policies affected certain groups. Honestly I shied away from calling myself a “communist” for a while because of this history. Where do Gypsies belong in a communist society, if the only examples we have are ones that ultimately viewed us as problems? How does a good communist society allow for people to not be forced to integrate and assimilate if they do not wish to? Does the better living situations/employment outweigh the need to hold onto cultural practices? Do non-Roma get to decide who is worthy of communism if we do not fully conform to the society (without trying to actively undermine it either)? I am not trying to start a struggle session, believe me. But I believe it is important for everyone — white communists and other nonWhite communists who likely benefit from antiziganism too — to look into the history of Romani people, both under communism/socialism and other types of governments. We are one of the world’s most persecuted groups, and our history does matter in how we go about the future. We always want to strive to do better.

I’ll leave it off on this note: “On the one hand, living conditions of Roma and their educational level has seen a rapid improvement in comparison with past historic periods, the degree of their integration has grown, and considerable strata of relatively well educated Roma have emerged etc. On the other hand, however, the price paid for this integration is quite high.” (10)

Disclaimer: Not all these sources are exactly pro-Communism, but most are unbiased and focused on facts. Some of them also come across vaguely antiziganist. You would be hard pressed to find a source that is 100% without antiziganism and antiCommunism, so I tried my best. Also no struggle session on whether these govs were "actually communist/socialist" please. Let us just be respectful of Roma history. Also I am a tankie so don't try to make me seem anti-commie as well. ALSO I am Roma so it's fine that I said Gypsy. Okay, that's all.

Links for sources.

  • grisbajskulor [he/him]
    ·
    4 years ago

    Just wanted to thank you for this, super informative!

    Heads up: Uninformed spontaneous takes.

    I don't think you can be a serious leftist if you aren't willing to criticize decisions made in leftist states. History should be treated as a series of experiments & case studies. No state is perfect. Forced integration always seems to end up a cruel affair, and I'm sure many decisions were made from a place of prejudice, rather than economic liberation. It would take a lot of confidence to ever consider something like that a necessary evil.

    The Sámi people are a nomadic ethnic group in Scandinavia and are another interesting case study. Historically brutalized and a subject of prejudice, they do retain some nomadic freedoms today, herding reindeer etc, even if many are settled today. One of my favorite unique laws in Sweden is that basically all land away from private property is public land, so you can set up a tent and hang out anywhere you want. However the govt has done cruel things in other ways, destroying important Sámi sites as recently as 2011.

    • rozako [she/her]
      hexagon
      ·
      4 years ago

      I haven’t heard much about the Sámi people before. Thanks for sharing! It’s interesting to see some of the parallels.

      • grisbajskulor [he/him]
        ·
        4 years ago

        To be honest I have no idea about this stuff, my comment should only spur curiosity to read other sources

  • Gay_Wrath [fae/faer]
    ·
    4 years ago

    Good post, thanks for effortposting about this.

    also yeah, highly disappointing when a social movement for equality conveniently leaves people out. Like believe me, i'm still happy to call myself a communist and critically support China against western imperialism, but uhh they could have been a lot better about gay rights. I mean, i don't think any nation holds actually up the standard for what i want for trans people. Still think they could all do better even if they're doing relatively good in other areas, regardless of if it's a country i like or dislike.

    The same is unfortunately true for other social movements, disabled people are really left out of every conversation about equality all the time. Like, gay people can get married, but disabled people can't, because they'll lose their benefits most of the times. And then it's expected that your able bodied partner has more to say about what happens to your body than you do.

    Anyway, i'm not trying to make excuses for past oppression by saying this. There's really no excuse to leave marginalized groups behind when it comes to furthering equality. The world has gotta get better, and we gotta build it. It's lib shit to leave some groups out or treat them differently.

    Also,

    A maximum permissible portion of Roma per community was set at 5%

    jesus

    • rozako [she/her]
      hexagon
      ·
      4 years ago

      Yes I agree with all your points. It is too uncommon to leave specific people (usually the most “undesirable” populations like disabled, trans, and Romani people) out of certain discussions or movements. It happens in the past, it happens now, it happens even on this site. We do always have to strive to do better and to advocate for who we tend to continuously forget about.

      Yes the 5% thing is so cruel right. The quote about animals and Gypsies being portioned out really got to me when I read it.

    • rozako [she/her]
      hexagon
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 years ago

      That's a question I find hard to answer. Forced assimilation is bad, for sure, but I also will not deny that in many places, it did help further employment. Nowadays, most Roma are not nomadic. So there wouldn't have to be forcing people to settle. Instead, most Roma live on the outskirts of towns (as a mix of forced and self segregation). More Roma nowadays are less traditional and don't mind mixing with/working with non-Roma. So it's less complicated nowadays than previously.

      Ultimately I'd want to leave it to Roma. We give them their basic rights: housing, healthcare, free education, offers for employment. If some prefer to live in their own section of a town alone, so be it. I see no need to do what a lot of the countries did by forcing them to disperse. Honestly, I think the only real issue would be getting us to attend education because a lot of us do not trust schools (for reasons that are obvious if you look into how Europe treats Roma in schools). But eventually, after trust is established by the hypothetical state, I think most Roma would be willing to fully participate in the society. Hopefully that makes sense?

      Political attitudes depend on the group and location of the Roma. Some are very traditional: young marriages, homophobia, enforced gender roles, wanting to not interact with non-Roma. Some are very assimilated into the country they live in and will likely hold the majority country's opinions. Younger generations I feel are becoming more liberal as in questioning gender roles, learning of socialism, wanting to receive higher education. No one group of people will ever have the exact same political attitudes, so it is a big mix really.

  • bottech [he/him]
    ·
    4 years ago

    Good post, and yeah, its pretty tragic the persecution roma people faced and still face today. I live in poland and racism against them is very widely diffused throughout society

    • rozako [she/her]
      hexagon
      ·
      4 years ago

      I’ve heard in Poland there was some racist rhetoric/theories that Roma were especially the cause of Corona spreading. Did you ever hear anything like that?

      • bottech [he/him]
        ·
        4 years ago

        No, i havent heard anything like that but im pretty ignorant on anything thats currently happening in poland so i cant confirm nor deny that its the case

  • mrbigcheese [he/him]
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 years ago

    I'm from Romania, and i'd say the treatment of Roma today is very bad, people look at them with contempt and theres definitely heavy racism involved. Its one of the main groups that right wing politicians can use as a scapegoat for why things are bad while deflecting away from the failures of neoliberalism after 89. Because there are no real government programs helping these communities they often live in very bad conditions in ghettos, and those who do live in cities and towns are discriminated against for various cultural reasons. The quote here is partially true, many rural communities in general not just Roma underwent rezoning and urbanizations during a push to industrialize large swats of the country that were still primarily self sustaining peasants. The communists never managed to fully address this disparity, though they made headway in providing better living conditions and job opportunities for many communities, and yes id say the program was at times received badly by those communities who were used to just living off their land or didnt really want anything to do with the communists and their industrialization plans. However I cant stress how bad conditions can often be in these places. Ive been to some old villages, some of my family still have old farms and people basically to this day live in very old and very poor conditions, in some places basically in shacks. You wouldnt ever see this in the poorest neighborhoods or rural communities in the US.

    • rozako [she/her]
      hexagon
      ·
      4 years ago

      I agree with your last few sentences about some of complete horrible poverty of some of these places. Where I’m from in Greece, it is basically a village shantytown. Few people had running water or electricity.

      • mrbigcheese [he/him]
        ·
        4 years ago

        Its hard to really convey this to people who arent from these regions and who havent seen how bad living conditions can be even today among certain populations. And its not a matter of difference in culture that spurred these plans during that time, if you're living in a poor village it means your children live in poverty, cant get a good education, have no mobility, and often suffer from malnutrition, hard working conditions, inadequate healthcare, poor infrastructure, and lack of basic utilities. I think the ideas the communists had to undertake industrialization and urbanize large swats of the country was a necessity to combat the historical disadvantages faced by eastern european countries during that time in order to combat western european capitalist influence.

        On the question of what happens in a socialist state with people who want nothing to do with what the communist party is trying to do you'll always get mixed ideas. There are many instances in Romania where relocations and urbanization efforts left many people extremely begrudging of what the projects the communists imposed onto them tried to do or what they did not carry out properly in some cases. I can't romanticize any sort of peasant life though, ive seen personally how bad it really can be in poor parts of the country. Regarding specifically Roma I'm not sure what the correct undertaking is, i mean I know a lot of Roma in Romania dont just travel around as some groups do. Im actually not too familiar with their culture specifically, only ever really met Roma who lived in cities/ towns and been through poorer villages/ towns where a lot of them live.

        • rozako [she/her]
          hexagon
          ·
          4 years ago

          i mean I know a lot of Roma in Romania dont just travel around as some groups do. Im actually not too familiar with their culture specifically, only ever really met Roma who lived in cities/ towns and been through poorer villages/ towns where a lot of them live.

          Yeah, nomadic Romani groups are not very common anymore. Primarily they are segregated (both forcibly and by choice) in very poor parts of towns rather than living like, in the woods as some people may imagine or as it may have been in the past.

          • mrbigcheese [he/him]
            ·
            4 years ago

            Being Roma, do you happen to know any socialist Roma that you recommend reading?

            • rozako [she/her]
              hexagon
              ·
              4 years ago

              Honestly, no. There are so few Roma writers in general let alone any discussing leftism and how it applies to us. Perhaps there is in some other language, but I haven't found any in English.

              Here is a pretty detailed article on some activism done by Roma. That website + ERRC is more left-leaning in general if you want to learn more!

  • hogposting [he/him,comrade/them]
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 years ago

    This is an understatement -- sterilizing people against their will is genocide, after all -- but there's ample room for criticism here. We should not shy away from these criticisms, but we should contextualize them. The Parenti maxim of "compare a government to what came before it" comes to mind, and the corollaries to that are "compare a government to its contemporary peers" and "compare a government to what came after it." Treatment of minority groups throughout history has generally ranged from poor to genocidal, and while communist treatment of the Roma still falls along that spectrum, its seems in most places it was on the "better" end of it (to the extent treatment that leaves much to be desired can be considered "better" than outright persecution).

    GOOD post

  • RedCoat [he/him]
    ·
    4 years ago

    Thanks for the post, a good critic on how most communist systems were poorly implimented for Roma comunities. I know similarish questions have been asked but what would be your personal preference for how a socilist state could best work with Roma communities?

    I guess working with any nomadic group (though you have pointed out most Roma communities are settled now) provides some extra difficulties for a completely planned economy, though I feel it would be easier today with better planning tools available. I'd hope as FALGSC becomes more of a possibility that people would be much more chill about letting other people be.

    • rozako [she/her]
      hexagon
      ·
      4 years ago

      what would be your personal preference for how a socilist state could best work with Roma communities?

      I have touched upon this in another comment a bit, but I'll expand it further. Nowadays, like you said, most Roma are not nomadic. The real issue is that many of us do not particularly enjoy being around other non-Roma. The idea of the gadzikano (nonRoma) world/mindset vs the Romano world/mindset is a huge thing in our culture especially for those who are more traditional. This is why many of us do not go to school for very long or why Roma may prefer to stay in their segregated areas than ever integrate. For me, I think this should be allowed. If a group of Roma wish to live on the outskirts of town, I see no reason to force them to be part of the community for them to recieve the benefits of better housing, healthcare, food, etc. Offer to create better houses or install electricity/running water in the areas they already live in rather than forcing them to go elsewhere for it. Ensure schools are not segregated like they are now, and I believe more Roma would go to them. Offer free healthcare and nonsegregated medical attention, and more Roma likely will go to these doctors. I think in a socialist state, we would have to meet halfway. I said it in the other comment, but I do believe that once trust is established between the state and Roma, more Roma will want to interact with the community in a larger way. But forcing them to integrate (and lose cultural practices because of it) to prove they are worthy of the basic essentials in life is not what I'd want to see.

      Hopefully that makes sense. Honestly, the idea of self-segregation in the Roma world is very complex. I can try to explain more if anyone is curious, but yeah. Centuries of some of the world's worst persecution towards a group will need time to heal before trust can be established, before they will wish to fully be a part of the society.

    • rozako [she/her]
      hexagon
      ·
      4 years ago

      Very well said! I agree almost entirely as well. I’ve heard so little about Lenin and Islam and Chechnya. I’m going to look into this now, thank you!

    • rozako [she/her]
      hexagon
      ·
      4 years ago

      Oh yes, it's absolutely vile. I have met quite a few European people who will go as far to describe themselves as Communist while still being so antiziganist. Hell, I'd have someone on this site alone be like "well ACTUALLY gypsies make the neighbourhood dirty and full of crime --" so yeah. I really mean it when I say we are probably like top 3 most hated groups in the history of the world. It's very scary.

  • kristina [she/her]
    ·
    edit-2
    4 years ago

    My grandparents lived in Czechoslovakia and I think they mentioned having some Romani in their farming village at one point, I could poke them and ask about attitudes.

    edit: for the record my family is mixed ethnicity and had to deal with a lot of dumb shit too.

    • rozako [she/her]
      hexagon
      ·
      4 years ago

      That'd be cool to hear what they'd have to say! Let us know if you ask.

      • kristina [she/her]
        ·
        edit-2
        4 years ago

        i sent them a message about it, idk if theyll respond to it specifically they dont like talking about ethnic tension stuff a lot because a lot of the family left because of it. some of my family was german, polish, czech, austrian, it was a huge mix, so theyd get bullied a lot over it.

        • rozako [she/her]
          hexagon
          ·
          4 years ago

          I get that. My older family members can be very similar.

          I'm sorry to hear about that. In a lot of the sources linked, they also discuss German immigrants in some of the countries mentioned as well iirc, if you wanna ctrl+f and read more about that!

          • kristina [she/her]
            ·
            edit-2
            4 years ago

            tbh i dont feel sorry for a lot of the germans that got kicked out but i know some definitely slipped through the cracks on it. if you were a registered party member of the Sudeten German Party they would get thrown out along with extended family because the family wouldnt want to get broken up obviously, especially since membership was heavily male and society was patriarchal so a lot of the women and children were forced to string along. our family had germans in it and didnt get kicked out because they werent awful people.

            ill read it though.

            edit: btw its estimated about 80% of the germans in the region were affiliated with the SDP. they were huge and very scary and did typical nazi things like terrorist attacks and attacking people. the only opposition among germans was the social democrats and the communists. there were no liberals at all. and the social democrats werent exactly the same as the ones that killed rosa, they actually had a backbone, more akin to russian social democrats before the communist party got big

    • albanianbolshevik [none/use name]
      ·
      4 years ago

      It was a nationalization procces. The romani people had to be assimilated for the nationalization procces to be concluded. First of all they had to be proletarianized.

      People need to understand that communism means proletarization. The same critique of communists comes from peasant lovers who hate communism becuase communism forced them to lose their small land and collectivize with the porpuse of making them proletariat. Nomadic way of life does not fit in communism. At least this is how the communist parties saw the issue.

    • rozako [she/her]
      hexagon
      ·
      4 years ago

      Yeah, all these countries had been very antiziganist beforehand, but I still believe there is no excuse for a communist state to do racist things.

      On the idea of fortune telling: it depends on the specific group. Some of us genuinely believe in fortune telling/tarot and use it even amongst ourselves. Some of us sort of believe it but still primarily use it on nonRoma for money. But the notion that it is entirely a scam stems from antiziganist beliefs. As well, it has been one of the very few ways Roma women were ever able to make money historically, and hardy ever targeted vulnerable people? I’m not sure who that would be referring to. And telling people to abandon a tradition they’ve had for like 500 years isn’t cool to me.

      Also Romani people did stuff when they were nomadic. Most of our “clan” names derive from the type of work we did: foraging for mushrooms in forests, metalwork, taming bears, music, sewing. These are all things that can be done nomadically. And as I said in another comment, hardly any Roma nowadays are nomadic anyways. Also I don’t like the idea that a people have to do productive work to be treated fairly, or that the only productive work seems to be factories and farming, but we may just differ there.

      • rozako [she/her]
        hexagon
        ·
        4 years ago

        Also to add onto the fortunetelling bit, that has been a thing used to persecute us, paint us as heretical, and forcing us from certain towns during our beginnings in Europe. It is no good to feed into the stereotype of it being horrible.

    • doublepepperoni [none/use name]
      ·
      edit-2
      4 years ago

      I just don’t see what productive work can be done by a nomadic society as they can’t work in factories or grow crops

      If you're not being productive, I suppose you might as well not exist at all

      • Rodentsteak [he/him]
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 years ago

        "He who does not work, neither shall he eat" I suppose.

        • BreadandRoses76 [he/him,comrade/them]
          ·
          4 years ago

          I genuinely cant tell , is this a bit? Cause a persons basic needs being met should not have anything to do with whether or not they work.

          • rozako [she/her]
            hexagon
            ·
            4 years ago

            What's even more confusing is the OP also seemingly defended Irish travellers right before making this comment... I suppose if the white nomads do anything, tis fine, but god forbid brown nomads be unproductive. Weird.

            • BreadandRoses76 [he/him,comrade/them]
              ·
              4 years ago

              I think this website legit has a problem with some colonial attitudes, like a peoples way of life should not have to be evaluated in terms of "usefulness" or "productivity" miss me with that colonizer shit.

              • rozako [she/her]
                hexagon
                ·
                4 years ago

                I love this site a lot, but it's always good to remember it is primarily white and primarily American. And in times like this, that can be very obvious.

          • Rodentsteak [he/him]
            ·
            edit-2
            4 years ago

            i think you need to expand your frame of reference beyond "I am responding with a bit" and "I am responding to disagree with someone". I am reframing what someone said with an old and controversial communist slogan.

          • Rodentsteak [he/him]
            ·
            4 years ago

            It's actually Lenin. Well, Lenin and the bible. It always struck me as a pretty harsh sentiment.

    • BreadandRoses76 [he/him,comrade/them]
      ·
      4 years ago

      It is incredibly colonial to disregard an entire culture by saying you don't see what "productive" work they can do for the state. Human beings do not exist to produce goods.

    • Mardoniush [she/her]
      ·
      edit-2
      4 years ago

      I can think of like 5 "useful jobs a nomadic group could do." Like the Transport sector alone...

      • rozako [she/her]
        hexagon
        ·
        4 years ago

        A Romani-made caravan transport system would be more functional than like any American public transportation I’m sure lol.

      • Rodentsteak [he/him]
        ·
        4 years ago

        Interesting idea. Not really how their nomadic lifestyle typically works. Its not like they have a "Speed" like requirement that they must move x miles every day or explode. Moving is just part of their culture, it's what they do. Plenty of their clans are settled, and some even have traditional trades (The kalderash are smiths, metalworkers and jewellers traditionally, though of course not necessarily). Trying to force them into becoming truckers is as misguided as trying to tie them to the land by force.

        They CAN and DO perform labour, and any attempt to integrate them into a system must be a co-operative process that respects that.

        • Mardoniush [she/her]
          ·
          4 years ago

          Not necessarily truckers, and certainly not forced. But there are plenty of jobs that require movement and I was trying to point out that there are plenty of trades where regular group movement is entirely compatible with modern society.