The Roma voted not out of hope, but out of lucidity. They gave a lucid vote, not a loyal one.
In the first round of the presidential elections of 2025, the Roma communities were silent. A heavy, but not passive silence – but deeply political. In many of the localities with significant Roma population, the presence at the ballot box was below 24%. Some have interpreted this fact as “civic apathy” or “chronic disinterest”.
But, as an internal report made by Roma for Democracy Foundation shows, the reality is different: the Roma did not run away from democracy-they refused to legitimize. The boycott was a gesture of lucidity. To vote means to grant power, and the state, in its current form, gives Roma neither representation, no protection, no recognition. Why would he have validated him?
Vote as a form of democratic constraint
But something has changed between tours. In just two weeks, silence turned into reaction. In 144 localities where the Roma represents over 5% of the electorate, the presence at the vote increased on average by 5.71 percentage points.
In the most excluded of them, the growth has exceeded 27 points. It was not an emotional return to the ballot box, but a strategic movement. An action of self -defense in the face of the real danger of an authoritarian regime led by George Simion, a politician who constantly refused the dialogue with the civic organizations of the Roma and who raised Xenophobia and Euroscepticism at the political program level.
What happened in round II is not a triumphal return to the fortress, but a lucid intervention, a gesture of collective survival. As James Holston (2008) and Partha Chatterjee (2004) explain, the excluded citizens do not give up politics – but a practice through alternative, often reactive, but profoundly strategic forms. Thus, this time, the Roma did not vote to support a political project, but to stop a dangerous one.
The gesture made by Nicușor Dan
And the only candidate who understood the tension of this moment was Nicușor Dan. Not through a proactive platform or promises, but by a symbolic gesture, but extremely valuable in the eyes of the community: the public signing of the manifesto #No Dandatatărănoi, launched by the Roma for Democracy organization.
He was the only one who clearly recognized the exclusion of Roma as a democratic problem. And he did something else: recently, in 2024, he officially acknowledged the foundation of Romanian activism by inaugurating Nicolae Gheorghe market – a gesture of deep civic memory.
Nicolae Gheorghe was not just a sociologist. He was the parent of the Roma civic movement in Romania and one of the architects of the international recognition of the Roma as a transnational minority. His recognition by a mayor in office, in a public space, had a huge symbolic weight. Many Roma have not forgotten this gesture. And in the second round, they reacted.
The results are clear: in the analyzed localities, the votes for Nicușor Dan increased from 26,460 in the first round to 131,862 in round II – an increase of over 400%. Almost 16% of the votes that have provided him with victory come from these communities. It is not a majority. But it's a decisive edge. Without it, Victoria would not have been possible.
The end of the intermediaries. The beginning of direct representation
This mobilization did not occur through traditional channels. On the contrary: In the localities dominated by the networks of the dominant parties or those of the Roma party, the participation remained low. The legitimacy of the clientele intermediaries collapsed. Another form of political action appeared: direct representation.
Mobilization was led by informal networks, young activists, organizations such as Roma for Democracy, women-lider and unofficial leaders who refused the idea that democracy should be delivered “from above”. It was not about loyalty, but about lucidity. About a limit imposed by the bottom up.
In the words of the anthropoloage Anna Mirga, what I saw in May 2025 was a form of “resistance through civic pragmatism”: a mobilization that does not require favors, but imposes respect.
The lessons of the Romanian vote
The electoral experience of the Roma communities in 2025 contradicts the dominant myths about passivity and manipulation. Their vote was:
- Calculated, not emotional;
- Reactive, not passive;
- Against exclusion, not for an ideology;
- Activated by recognition, not promises;
- Coordinated by civic activism, not by clientele structures.
As Martha Nussbaum (2011) argues, citizenship means not only political rights, but also dignity. In 2025, the Roma acted not to ask, but to stop. Their vote was an emergency brake drawn in front of a possible democratic collapse.
The vote of the Roma was a gesture of collective defense. Their absence in the first round was a protest. Their return to the second round – a warning. Roma no longer accept to be treated as a maneuver. No longer accept imposed loyalties. No longer accept silence. The Roma did not ask for favors. They said, simply and clearly, “not without us.” And, remarkably, a candidate listened to him. And their vote mattered – decisive.
