Victor Eftimiu îl critică pe Stelian Popescu la comandă Elenei Lupescu.

In 1935, Victor Eftimiu published a broşura entitled “Jos labele de pe tricolor,” attacking Stelian Popescu, whom he labeled as a “gangster of the press.” Eftimiu’s critique, while less virulent than that of his contemporary Aurora, emphasized what he viewed as the moral corruption perpetrated by Popescu, particularly through his control of the major newspaper “Universul.” He painted a grim picture of the media landscape in Romania, likening it to the violent gangs of Chicago, with journalists wielding their pens as weapons to terrorize those who did not conform to their narratives. Eftimiu’s rhetoric was laced with potent imagery, claiming that journalists in Romania had manipulated the national flag (the tricolor) for their own gain.

Eftimiu scrutinized Popescu’s background, noting that he was the son of a provincial priest and had little formal experience in journalism. Instead, he accused Popescu of amassing wealth through dubious means and using his media power to construct a divide within Romanian society, categorizing citizens into “good Romanians” and “traitors” based on their financial contributions to his publication. This notion of blackmail in the name of patriotism was particularly scathing; Eftimiu argued that Popescu had sullied the country’s values while presenting himself as a defender of the nation.

The broşura included various documents purported to prove Popescu’s nefarious character, claiming that while Eftimiu had ignored him previously, revelations about Popescu’s questionable dealings had come to light via extensive dossiers sent to him. Eftimiu made a distinct point to differentiate between baseless allegations and solid evidence, asserting that he would focus on the latter to substantiate his claims regarding Popescu’s transgressions.

Interestingly, the true sources of Eftimiu’s information about Popescu emerged years later, in 1940, when the regime led by General Ion Antonescu began to disclose the past of figures like Elena Lupescu and the connections they made in society. The exposure of these details paralleled future revelations about the regime of Nicolae Ceaușescu, illustrating a cyclical nature of denouncing previous corrupt practices. In a 1940 article from “Universul,” there was a further attempt to denigrate Eftimiu, accusing him of fabricating stories during the time when nationalistic sentiments were rising in Romania. Eftimiu’s attacks on Popescu were framed as politically motivated, an effort to undermine the very nationalist movement that Popescu was believed to support.

Thus, Eftimiu’s pamphlet and Popescu’s subsequent responses highlight the fraught interplay between media and politics, as well as the personal vendettas that often inform public narratives. This clash between two powerful figures from the world of Romanian journalism during a tumultuous period in the country’s history reflects larger themes of identity, patriotism, and the struggle for moral and ethical standards in public discourse.