Andrei Pleșu, Dilema.ro: The Martyrdom of the Romanian Language

We should all be ashamed of what is happening in Romania for some time now. We have managed to enter Europe by stepping out of the world's queue. We have become, as never before, an absurd island, a conglomerate of waste, floating adrift. Our daily life oscillates between ridicule and convulsion, between misery and delirium. We are all guilty and we are all victims. How could we rehabilitate ourselves in our own eyes and in the eyes of others? What is left to save? Sometimes – professional deformation – I tell myself that only the Romanian language, with its small treasure of untranslatable expressions, deserves another posterity. But it is clear, on the other hand, that it has never been more mocked than now. It is spoken of in a bloody manner, with an appetite for promiscuity and degradation from which we will hardly be able to heal. The life of the city has become a bath of vulgarity. We are in the eye of a toxic whirlwind, of a tornado, which risks disfiguring us.

Shortly before he died, Socrates told his friend Crito: "...the bad use of words is not just a language mistake, but also a way of doing harm to souls" (Phaidon, 115, e). To speak sloppily, angrily, offensively, crudely, and, moreover, incorrectly, to pay no attention to the weight of words, to say anything about anyone, to speak to provoke anger or pain are all ways of introducing, into the environment in which you manifest, a dangerous poison. You spoil good taste, offend decency, disturb the natural order of things, and deform souls. The demand for a good use of language is addressed especially to the people and institutions for whom speaking is a profession: the press in all its variants, schools at all levels, writers and politicians. These are the "media" that create models. From this area, valid criteria are expected for establishing a lifestyle and coexistence commensurate with human dignity. A parliamentarian giving a speech does not only have to convey a political message, nor just counter an opponent's opinion: he delivers to his audience a way of being, a certain behavioral design, a global feeling of public order and values. "What would you do, first and foremost, if you were offered the task of governing?" – was asked, at one point, Confucius. His answer sounded like this: "The essential thing is to name things correctly. If the names are not correct, the words do not fit anymore. If the words do not fit anymore, state affairs go wrong. If state affairs go wrong, neither rituals nor music can flourish anymore. If rituals and music can no longer flourish, judgments and punishments cease to be just. If judgments and punishments cease to be just, the people no longer know how to behave." Therefore, since community order depends to such an extent on the correctness of language, it means that the first duty of a true government is the proper use of words. And that whoever uses words, whoever writes and speaks in the eyes of the world, touches the most intimate fabric of the nation and the state. To speak means to decide, indirectly, with every phrase spoken, about language, about judicial grounds, about rituals and about the arts. To be, in other words, moment by moment, a legislator, a creator of language, a teacher, a moralist, and an aesthetician. I admit that it is a huge burden. You cannot be Confucius for the entire duration of a mandate. But you cannot claim respect and legitimacy when your relationship with the language you speak is that of a recidivist violator.

P.S. February 8, 2026. Language includes not only words but also mimicry, facial echo, the expressive semblance of the face. I remembered this after hearing some critical comments a few days ago about the fact that Mr. Bolojan does not smile. He just cuts! I have two comments: 1) When the function and context force you to take drastic measures, to associate the act with tender smiles would sound like mockery, like cynicism. 2) We are not lacking smiles in the political world. Those who lack smiles have all sorts of solutions on our institutional stage: Mr. President Nicușor Dan practices smiling with an irrepressible candor. He often seems on vacation or in a friendly conversation... Another version of a trapped smile is Mr. Sorin Grindeanu. His preferred physiognomy is a charming, "charming", cunning (and false) promenade. All in all, those who want smiles have plenty to choose from. In short: Mr. Bolojan does not smile, but he does what he has to do. Mr. Grindeanu and company, it is unclear what they do, but they smile compensatorily. We have similar (even more dangerous!) cases abroad: have you seen how Putin smiles? You would say he just came from a party... At least Donald Trump is more plausible: apocalyptic laughter!

https://www.dilema.ro/situatiunea/martirajul-limbii-romane