The article analyzes the specificity and distinctiveness of authoritarian regimes operating in a global network of complex and multidimensional international relations. The author of the article asks the question: to what extent the dynamically changing paradigm of authoritarian ideology is responsible for the occurrence of various types of tensions, rivalries, and antagonisms caused by authoritarian regimes, the effects and consequences of which affect not only national and regional political conditions but also cause severe international repercussions? The applied research method allows exposing the complex particularity of authoritarian regimes in the context of the multidimensional dynamics of recent geopolitical changes. It is crucial when a number of modern ideological trends often downplay the brutal nature of many authoritarian systems and even treat the “authoritarian model” – especially in the form of socialist autocracies – as a “specific historical phenomenon” trying to resolve many complex and multiple political and economic issues.

Analyses of communist repression in post-communist Romania focused on anticommunism and its totemic figures. Laws, institutions and people promote this perspective, transforming the suffering of the formerly politically persecuted into a patrimony meant to be preserved and passed on. On the official level, the anticommunist paradigm gained momentum in December 2006 when the communist regime was condemned as ‘criminal and illegitimate’. However, a majority of the population have not embraced the official approach to communism as the fallen regime still acts as a ‘millieu de memoire’ (as defined by Pierre Nora). My article deals with the main institutions and laws which aimed at promoting and transmitting the memory of repression in post-communist Romania. Analyzing the memory politics as regards the communist repression might provide fresh insight into the ongoing process of building a cultural memory through selection, reconstruction and adjusting figures, deeds, and memorial items.

This chapter discusses how the memory of an influential figure of modern Romania’s history like Nicolae Iorga (1871–1940), a foremost historian-politician and nationalist intellectual, became instrumental in the three decades following the end of communism by politicians. As he is considered the father of Romanian nationalism and a symbol of the nationalist struggle on the eve of WWI, Iorga’s memory in contemporary Romania allows us to examine nationalism in politics. In the research, a qualitative approach was adopted to the subject by dealing with discourses and initiatives produced by politicians as agents of memory in post-communist Romania. By looking at the various strategies of remembrance used after 1989 by these memory entrepreneurs, the research investigates the politicians who honoured Iorga, the purpose of their engagement in such politics of memory, and what this says about how post-communist politics, nationalism and memory mingled.