Andrei Jebeleanu

    • This is where the shenanigans begin
  • When the lie becomes a country—Russia

    June 2nd, 2025

    This whole mess started on August 30, 1918.

    Picture this: a half-blind anarchist named Fanny Kaplan allegedly attempts to assassinate Lenin. Two bullets hit the old revolutionary messiah. He doesn’t die. She does—executed three days later, body incinerated, no trace left. Standard procedure for failed revolutionaries and inconvenient women.

    The textbooks call it The Red Terror. Lenin’s political enemies were purged en masse. The revolution got its steroids. The rest is, quite literally, history.

    Except it’s not.

    Because here’s the thing—Kaplan? She couldn’t plan an assassination if her life depended on it (and ironically, it did). She was too blind to shoot straight, too radical to be anyone’s puppet, and way too unpredictable to fit into a tidy Cheka narrative. Which is exactly why she was used.

    And that’s where the real story begins.

    Through this fragile, nearsighted woman, something vast was put into motion. Something we’re still living inside.

    You and me.

    Over a century later. Still stuck inside the ripple effect of a cover-up so audacious it makes modern psyops look like poorly staged theatre.

    I mean—can you even wrap your head around that? One propaganda stunt… and the world never walked straight again.

    Let me put it plainly: history—especially the Russian kind—isn’t a chronicle. It’s a psychodrama. A sustained campaign of narrative engineering designed to erase the real and replace it with the useful.

    And that’s not just conspiracy talk. That’s infrastructure. The disinformation wasn’t the smokescreen. It was the engine.

    In this case, the engine had one function: eliminate the opposition.

    Rewrite the script.

    Rename the villain.

    Retouch the blood.

    So yes, I’ll say it: disinformation—a subset of fiction, dressed up as intel—is the true founding myth of this nation we call Russia.

    And fiction is only dangerous when it forgets it’s fiction. When it starts building pipelines, training agents, redrawing borders, launching invasions. 

    When the lie becomes a country—
    And the only way to kill it is to tell the truth.

    But who dares?

  • Kakofrenia: Psychological Warfare for Civilian Use (How the Mind Was Taught to Eat Itself)

    June 2nd, 2025

    This is an excerpt from my upcoming novel, Suicide Service.
    The chapter is called “The Mind of a Thousand Identities”—a name that should tell you exactly where this is going and not nearly enough about how deep it goes.

    „If medicine is the science of healing, then where the hell is the science of falling apart?

    Seriously. We’ve got departments, think tanks, and foundations dedicated to longevity, anti-aging, and the gentle prolonging of biological optimism—but not a single formal discipline devoted to the art of ruin. Not even a subfield. No “Institute for Systematic Collapse.” No academic journal titled Dysphoria Quarterly.

    Why hasn’t anyone founded a school of thought—let’s call it kakophrenia—that takes seriously the slow, deliberate dismantling of the psyche? A rigorous study of how the human mind caves in under the weight of its own faculties? Where’s the curriculum for that? The PhD track in Elegant Disintegration?

    Because if there was such a field, it could only have emerged from dialectical materialism. Only a worldview that admits conflict as a primary law could accommodate such an idea: that what breaks us isn’t always external. Sometimes, it’s the whispering machinery inside us that sabotages itself—consciousness eating its own logic.

    Kakophrenia is a new way of framing an old truth: that the psyche, far from being a stabilizing force, is the ultimate ideological liability. A ghost that refuses to be disciplined. Personality? Subversion. The self? A bourgeois delusion. Consciousness? A divine leftover—some stubborn, ineffable fragment of the old gods that no revolution has managed to purge.

    If socialism failed to take over the world, blame the psyche. It’s the last divine artefact lodged like a shard in the human brain. You can remove religion, rewrite history, criminalize thought—but until you rewire the self from within, you’re just reprogramming hostages.

    That’s where kakophrenia comes in: a proposed science of sabotage. Not with tanks or propaganda, but with subtler tools—dreams, fears, mirrors, and double meanings. The idea is simple, elegant, and terrifying:

    Don’t cancel the psyche.
    Teach it to cancel itself.

    Because all of us are already multitudes. We are performances stitched together by habit and necessity. The lover. The child. The liar. The version of yourself you show your boss. The one you invent for strangers. All masks—and each mask, a proto-self.

    So where’s the line between a role and an identity?
    Where does the play end and the actor begin?

    Kakophrenia says: maybe it doesn’t.

    And if that unsettles you…
    Congratulations. You’re still human. For now.
    ”

    Here’s the official synopsis of the book. Yes, it has one. Apparently, even conspiracies need back cover copy:

    Long believed to have perished with totalitarianism, the New Man Project—that charmingly sinister attempt to redesign the human psyche for perfect ideological obedience—sits at the heart of the book.
    But this novel asks a less comfortable question:

    What if it didn’t end?
    What if, after the fall of the Berlin Wall, the project didn’t die… but quietly evolved?
    What if it was digitized, corporatized, disguised under the radiant smile of consumer capitalism?

    Set in contemporary Romania, Suicide Service follows Andrei Jebeleanu—a washed-up journalist turned accidental prophet—now teaching an experimental course called Visceral Journalism.
    What begins as an eccentric lecture morphs, in real time, into something far darker: the live dissection of a Cold War psychopolitical conspiracy known as The Suicide Service.

    Except this isn’t a story about the past.
    It’s about what survived.

    Because the most disturbing experiments weren’t abandoned.
    They were perfected.

    The novel cuts across a century, interweaving real events—like the infamous Pitești Experiment—with fictional conspiracies about identity, manipulation, and the engineering of docility. The methods have changed. The mission hasn’t.
    As one character puts it:

    “Totalitarian revolutions ended. Their experiments didn’t. You’re living proof.”

    Before identity curdles and the psyche turns cannibal—
    Would you read it?
    (Yes, I’m still talking about the book.)

  • Children’s Day for Grown-Ups: Hunter S., Cocaine, and the ∩-Shaped Manifesto

    June 1st, 2025

    Someone has to speak honestly about excess. About drugs. About the savage clarity of early-morning hallucinations. About the promises we make far too young. And about Hunter S. Thompson.

    He entered my life in 1994—uninvited, but perfectly timed—when his biography showed up in the mail without warning. I was thrilled, for several reasons. First, because the Universe clearly moonlights as my personal librarian. Second, because each of the book’s 352 pages sent me deeper into a delirium than any crack binge I later experimented with. But mostly, because it set me on a trajectory I’ve followed ever since.

    I had just turned sixteen and was, predictably, a terrified idiot.
    Fear, by the way, is one of the poisoned gifts of precocity.

    Reading too much, thinking too hard — these things have a way of dragging truths out of the shadows. Even the ones you’d rather keep hidden. I spent much of my adolescence haunted by the kind of fear usually reserved for people at the end of their lives. The kind of fear that makes you realize life isn’t a journey, it’s an ambush. Full of traps, strange detours, and the creeping suspicion that the worst is always yet to come.

    And then came The Strange and Savage Life of Hunter S. Thompson — a book that didn’t just find me, it mugged me in an alley and rewired my brain. Somewhere between the chaos and the cocaine residue of its pages, something clicked:
    Life isn’t a path. It’s a prank.
    It punishes precision. It humiliates those who plan.
    And it goes out of its way to wreck the dreams of anyone who dares say, “I know what I want.”

    That book shattered the glass case around a word I used to hate: journalism.
    Suddenly, it wasn’t about truth or ethics or structure. It was about style. Collapse. Risk.
    It was a job where failure could pass for poetry —
    where the useful and the useless were roommates —
    and where the boundary between real and unreal was so thin, you could snort it.

    Looking back? No, Hunter wasn’t a blueprint.
    But he was something more important:
    Permission.
    Permission to live a life worth documenting.
    To believe that excess is a narrative choice.
    That imbalance isn’t a flaw — it’s a form of honesty. And that sometimes, the most professional thing you can do is fall apart with conviction.

    The book didn’t end with the last page — it ended with a promise.
    Because somewhere in the wreckage of my teenage brain — flooded with unregulated dopamine and literary crushes — I made a vow:
    To leave the door open. Just wide enough for a bit of his madness to sneak in, and stay awhile.

    Why I made that promise, I have no idea.

    With all due respect to teenagers — and their enviable gift for phantasmagoria — the truth is: at sixteen, you know nothing. And what little you think you know is spectacularly wrong.

    A decent example? Just ask a teenager what happens after forty.
    In the adolescent imagination, turning forty means one thing: collapse. Prostate malfunctions. A belly that spreads like jihadist extremism across the Sahel. And insomnia — vast, biblical insomnia — that settles in until death. It doesn’t matter how gracefully you try to age. From the high seat of sixteen, every promise you make sounds like a hallucination in disguise — a beautiful glitch destined to ruin the code of your future.

    Let me make it simple: life is a rocket. It moves upward on a graph.
    The vertical axis: physical time.
    The horizontal one: psychological time — your perception of meaning.
    The rocket launches at birth and is meant to arc toward something vaguely profound. Then, eventually, it slams into the horizontal axis in a soft, poetic crash called death.

    But in the teenager’s mind? That rocket hits an imaginary glass ceiling at forty and plummets. Game over.
    The shape of life, for them, is an ∩ — an upside-down U.
    That’s the native geometry of their cosmic software.
    Everything past the midpoint is just: decline. entropy. embarrassing dad jokes.
    Or, as they so graciously put it:
    “You’re done, old man.”

    Roughly a day ago, I turned forty. Which, if you subscribe to the ∩ theory of life (you know, birth—peak—slow-motion collapse), means I’d officially bounced off the ceiling of my physical timeline and entered free fall. For the first time ever, I was perfectly colinear with my own death. A poetic alignment, if you ignore the heartburn.

    Naturally, I took it as a sign.
    A sign to consume pantagruelian amounts of cocaine.

    But since even collapse needs a concept deck, I rebranded the whole spiral as a shamanic expedition. A pilgrimage through debris. Armed with synthetic revelations, pixelated self-compassion, and a single, flickering question — Is life still worth living after forty? — I dove in.

    Forty-eight hours later, drifting somewhere between dream-paralysis and the quiet terrorism of withdrawal, I think I came back with an answer. Not a cure — an aphorism:

    “Maturity is the most unhygienic lollipop humanity has ever sucked on.”

    And maybe even a mission:

    “Ungrow yourself. Unbecome the adult they conscripted you to be.”

    Which, frankly, makes perfect sense. If humanity ever hosted a golden age of immaturity, it’s now. The third millennium. An entire era built so you can live — cradle to cremation — with the inner stance of an adolescent who never agreed to grow up.

    Sure, we can’t stay kids forever — biology is a bureaucrat with no sense of humor. Growth hormones are fascists. Your thymus shrinks. Your ovaries or testicles punch in, clock out, fulfill their evolutionary contract. One day you’re sipping energy drinks at 2 a.m., the next you’re getting targeted ads for bunion surgery, addressed to your full legal name in Times New Roman.

    But mentally? Mentally, we must preserve a kind of sacred ambiguity. Feed it with excess. Dress it in irony. Water it with disregard. Keep alive that sweet, belligerent instinct to stay gloriously unfinished — gloriously unready. To remain juveniles of the soul. Maladjusted in all the right ways.

    Because maturity — this grotesque idol we polish from cradle to grave — is just spiritual progeria. A premature aging of the soul. An accelerated collapse of all the parts that once made you unbearable in the best way.

    To be “mature” today?

    It means having a job you loathe but still pledge 16 hours a day to, like it’s some kind of capitalist Stockholm syndrome.
    It means owning a house that never feels like yours — but which will quietly siphon your joy (and your credit score) for the next half-century.
    It means clinging to a circle of “friends” you trust about as much as a rental scooter in a snowstorm — decorative liabilities with Instagram accounts.

    Maturity is the world’s most socially acceptable form of dying before you’re dead.

    Eventually, when you finally look at your life with unfiltered honesty, you’ll realize you’ve become your own contradiction. And you’ll start to hate yourself for it. And that self-hatred will slowly begin to etch itself into your bitter smile. And that — that’s what will finally make you despise yourself. Not all at once, of course. It starts as a flicker. A small, bitter tic that shows up on your face every time you think about the life you didn’t live. The things you could’ve done. The people you might’ve been.

    If someone — early enough in life — had just pulled you aside and whispered the truth, maybe things would’ve unraveled differently:

    That maturity is a false virtue.
    More toxic than sugar. More addictive than nicotine.
    That it’s the final resting place of the boring, the sanctuary of the unimaginative, and the express route to early-onset spiritual sclerosis.

    Maybe then — just maybe — you’d still have a shot.
    A shot at becoming something other than a polite obituary in motion.

    So here it is — on June 1st, Children’s Day — a love letter to all the grown-ups who’ve gone off-script.
    To the ones who still feel like intruders in their own age group.
    To those quietly allergic to mortgages, HR pep talks, and “wellness.”
    To the ones who look in the mirror and think: This can’t be it. I refuse to be fully assembled.

    And to them — to us — I say:
    Happy Birthday.
    Not the version with balloons and frosting.
    The other kind.
    The one where you hit forty, blink twice, and decide to reverse-engineer your entire personality — not because it’s wise, but because it’s the only thing that still feels honest.

    Not a rebirth. Not a midlife crisis.
    Just… a strategic glitch in the adulting software.
    Celebrate accordingly.

  • The Unbearable Accuracy of Being Me

    May 31st, 2025

    (I resent agreeing with myself, but what can I say? I’m always right. About everything. All the time. It’s exhausting. Really)

    I resent agreeing with myself. But I keep doing it. Reluctantly. Repeatedly. With the kind of regularity that should qualify as a medical condition.

    It’s not that I want to be right all the time. I just am. It’s practically involuntary. Like blinking. Or a hiccup. I’ve tried to throw myself off. Inject a little doubt. Run a few internal sabotage missions. Whisper things like “what if I’m wrong?”just to see if I flinch.

    But it never lasts. I always win.

    The real problem? I see it coming. The moment I open my mouth, there it is—my own voice echoing back, smug and unbothered. And I hate that. Not because it’s wrong. But because it isn’t.

    I’ve tried being humble. It looks good on other people. Doesn’t fit me. Like a borrowed coat from someone far less irritating.

    So yes. I resent agreeing with myself. But what can I say? I’m always right. About everything. All the time.

    And it’s exhausting. Really.

  • Hiding: Humanity’s Real Hobby

    May 31st, 2025

    (If Heidegger played Blind-man’s buff, this would be the rulebook)

    Let’s be honest—though I resent agreeing with myself, I was always right: everything hidden will, eventually, be dragged into the light. An inconvenient axiom, if you really think about it. Because it tells us something unpleasant about ourselves: that when given the choice between illumination and concealment, we instinctively choose the latter.

    History isn’t a story of truth—it’s the biography of how we make things unclear. Blur them. Smudge the facts. Like squids releasing ink clouds or chameleons melting into branches, we’ve evolved our own defense mechanisms: denial, euphemism, distraction, and polite avoidance. We spend our lives erasing the obvious and tucking away everything indecent, unbearable, socially clumsy—or just personally embarrassing. Not only from others, but especially from ourselves.

    Light bothers us. It insists on clarity. And so we use it only as a reference point—for moving in the opposite direction. Our true migration path is toward the shadowlands: forgotten stairwells, sticky drawers, basements, browser histories, the unarchived corners of our minds. You want to understand humanity? Start with this:

    Hiding isn’t our flaw—it’s our favorite evolutionary trick.
    Obscurity is our mother tongue.
    We don’t seek truth—we master the art of making it evaporate.

    Try this simple exercise: pick a random day. Nothing special—any Tuesday will do. Now count.

    How many times did you drag something from the dark into the light?

    And how many times did you shove something into the dark—just to spite the light?

    Write it down. Be honest. Then—and only then—let’s talk about aletheia, that smug Greek word for “truth as unveiling.” But the real truth about truth? It’s not a revelation. It’s an indiscretion. Not an inquiry, but an interrogation.

    If everything we said came from a sincere desire to move closer to the light, then all speech would be confession. But who can do that? Who could survive that?

    Heidegger, bless his black turtleneck, got it right in the most catastrophically wrong way possible. If he’d truly believed in truth as disclosure, he would’ve called his life’s work Baba Oarba (Blind-man’s buff) —not Sein und Zeit.

    Because life isn’t Being and Time. Life is Blind Man’s Bluff. A game in which everyone else gets blindfolded and sent to chase whatever scraps of truth we’ve hidden—poor souls, spinning dizzy in circles while we stand perfectly still behind the curtain.

    And just to add insult to ontology: in this game, the winner is never the one who reveals themselves. It’s the one who masters the art of misdirection. The one who plants decoys. The one who vanishes. Beautifully. Convincingly. Almost metaphysically.

  • The Triumph of Being Wrong

    May 29th, 2025

    We don’t give enough credit to the Romanian expression “a fi de capul tău.” It’s often translated blandly as “to be on your own,” but that misses the point entirely.
    It’s a combination of to be your own master, to do things your way, to follow your head—all together, in one stubborn, glorious package. A fi de capul tău isn’t just solitude—it’s the head as headquarters. It’s the ego dressed up as command center. A full-blown humanist virtue, disguised as recklessness.

    And I genuinely believe every stage of life needs this kind of misguided triumphalism. What could be more glorious than placing your own head at the center of the universe and assuming everything is under control—especially when it clearly isn’t?

    Of course, a fi de capul tău comes at a cost. Heads are naturally egocentric. This attitude isolates you. It makes you petty, prejudiced, and (most dangerously) indifferent. But don’t be so quick to judge. Petty? Sure. Prejudiced? Probably. But indifference—now that’s underrated.

    Indifference is a brilliant defense mechanism. It’s nonviolent, satisfyingly visible, and long-lasting. You can maintain it for years without therapy, and its success rate is astonishingly high. I’d even go so far as to say it’s the emotional Tesla of self-preservation: silent, sleek, and ethically confusing.

    Which brings me back to the point: a fi de capul tău may not be noble, but it works.
    Case in point—my teenage years. Most of the choices I made back then were questionable, if not outright terrible. But somehow, that chapter of glorious self-delusion still shines.
    A triumphant mess.
    My head, my rules.

  • The Superlative of Being Alone

    May 27th, 2025

    There’s a strange kind of optimism in the way people talk about solitude.
    You’ve heard it. I’ve heard it.
    „Abia aștept să fiu singur.”
    “I can’t wait to be alone.”

    They say it as if loneliness were a scented candle and not a dismantling.
    But true loneliness — the kind that reconfigures your nervous system — doesn’t begin when you shut the door.
    It begins when you are the only one left in the room.

    Because real solitude is a relationship.
    One-on-one.
    You and… you.
    It’s an unmediated encounter with the self, without footnotes, playlists, or page-turners to soften the impact.
    Reading isn’t solitude.
    Watching a film isn’t solitude.
    Even painkillers dressed up as music or powder aren’t solitude.
    Those are escapes, neatly packaged.

    Loneliness — the real kind — is mimetic.
    It looks back at you with your own face.
    It reflects your honesty if you’re honest.
    Your depth, if you have any.
    Your terror, if you’ve hidden it long enough.

    In that sense, solitude is a diagnostic.
    If it feels oppressive, maybe you are.
    If it’s peaceful, maybe you’ve made peace.
    If it destroys you — it didn’t start the war. It just handed you the mirror.

    And maybe that’s why Giovanni Papini, the great iconoclast of spiritual literature, once confessed that loneliness had finished him off.

    As for me?
    I’ve lived most of my life thinking I knew what solitude was.
    Turns out I was just distracted.

    Until now.
    Now, there’s only me.
    And he doesn’t say much.

    — AJ

  • Two Houses, One Story, and the End of a Street

    May 26th, 2025

    The summer of 1977 began astronomically on June 21st, a Thursday, at precisely 1:07 p.m. That same day, out in the fields on the outskirts of Bucharest, torches were lit in a ritual effort to ward off pests. And it was on that very afternoon that Savva and Lana met for the first time — at the far end of Grigore Mora Street, a narrow slip of road wedged between Calea Dorobanți and the Zambaccian Museum, along the outer edge of the Mornand subdivision.

    You know the street. Once aristocratic, later bourgeois, it survived communism with a kind of quiet dignity, only to be undone by the newly rich in their relentless march toward capitalism. It’s a street that should have borne the name of Marcel Iancu — or one of his many identities: Hermann Janko, Cabaret Voltaire, Contimporanul. It remains, perhaps, the only street in the world that houses, just three doors apart, two of his architectural signatures: the Florica Reich House at number 39, and the Paul Wexler Villa at 36.

    Today, the street itself seems to confirm — bitterly and with irony — one of Iancu’s own maxims: “The great secret is here: thinking happens in the mouth.” In the mouths of the ignorant, the uncultured, and the obscenely wealthy — those who, by some cruel twist of history, have come to live there.

    I loved Grigore Mora Street for its ability to endure — to bend without breaking, to deceive with elegance when necessary. And yet, after weathering a century of upheaval, it was finally undone by the very people meant to preserve it: the Wexler villa disfigured by a graceless vertical addition that shattered its proportions; the Florica house, slowly erased by neglect.

  • I am the exquisite death of others

    May 25th, 2025

    Ego sum homo novus.
    If I am the New Man, then let me speak as one.

    I am what emerged from the calculated brutality of the Gulag and the ritual desecration of Pitești.
    I carry in my blood the pedagogical sadism of Țurcanu, Popa Țiganul, Patriciu, Crăciun.
    They were not men — they were the pain of other men. Instruments of erasure. Agents of hollowing out.

    Ego sum homo novus.
    Behold the new man — forged where history forgot it once had a heart.
    Where obedience replaced thought.
    Where silence replaced memory.
    Where death passed for mercy.

    I am a distilled artifact of fear, betrayal, and opportunism.
    Torture wears my face.
    Fear answers to my name.

    Very well, then: ego sum homo novus.
    But know this — I am not a prophecy fulfilled. I am a warning incarnate.
    The echo of every scream swallowed by doctrine.
    The residue of a world that learned to build futures from suffering.

    I offer you two options: obedience or extinction.
    Reeducation or erosion from within.
    I am the exquisite death of others — repackaged as salvation.

    And if I am one of them,
    then let me be the one who tells you plainly:
    you were warned.

  • The Old Jebeleanu Family – How to Survive an Ideological Purge 

    May 24th, 2025

    The old Jebeleanu family lived in the largest and most beautiful house on Grigore Mora Street, number 8 — a street that, despite every regime change, remained reserved for those who had turned opportunism into a method of political survival.

    Comrade Vasea Jebeleanu. Quiet. Efficient. Always half a doctrinal step ahead of the party line. And, of course, never entirely alone. Behind every survivor of an ideological purge stands someone sharper. In his case, it was his wife — Comrade Olga Baruch, a Komintern loyalist rebranded by circumstance as headmistress of School No. 20. She was often described, even decades later, with that familiar blend of fear and admiration: “a dangerous Jewess with an unmistakable Moscow accent.”

    In 1945, when the Romanian Communist Party (PCdR) still had two heads — one led by the local cadre around Gheorghiu-Dej, the other by the Muscovite exiles gathered around Ana Pauker — my grandfather quietly bet on the domestic faction. Alongside Petre Borilă, Leonte Răutu, and Alexandru Bârlădeanu, he moved into Dej’s orbit just early enough to matter, and just late enough not to seem eager.

    Then, in May 1952, when Ana Pauker, Vasile Luca, and Teohari Georgescu were publicly condemned for “factionalism, conciliationism, lack of class vigilance, cosmopolitanism, and deviationism both left and right”, he remained untouched.

    Political foresight? Not quite.
    Just a life built on the discipline of invisibility.

    His particular form of genius:
    never standing out.

←Previous Page
1 2 3 4 5
Next Page→

© 2025 – Andrei Jebeleanu

  • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Andrei Jebeleanu
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Andrei Jebeleanu
    • Subscribe Subscribed
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar