After reviewing the fall of communism in all the different countries in class, Romania was the only one that led a violent revolution. Was there a reason for this? The other countries were able to defeat communism without having to resort to violence so why couldn’t Romania do the same? Poland took down communism when free elections were held and the communists lost while the solidarity allied with the small parties. Hungary took down communism when the fence on the border of Austria was taken down and many East Germans fled to West Germany, forcing the East German government to take down the Berlin Wall. Lastly, Czechoslovakia took down communism by starting the Velvet Revolution. All three of these methods didn’t involve violence but were still successful. The people of Romania took part in armed uprisings and mass protests, which were very violent. I’m not completely sure why Romania was the only country that had to use violence to defeat communism but I feel it has a lot to do with their leader Nicolae Ceausescu. His ruthlessness and brutality might have proven to the people of Romania that the only way he could be overthrown was through violence, and that peaceful protests would be unsuccessful. Do you think there is another reason why Romania led a violent revolution against communism or was it all because of their communist leader?