Icons, old and new - (pages 19 - 20)
This happens at the very moment when our liberals are simply striving to cast our institutions, language and traditions in French moulds.
Now again, the following question arises: who could possibly think, in the late 1830, of importing all these expensive forms of Western culture to an agricultural country? Of course, only those knowing nothing about their own country.
Might this be because our reformers thought these things do not require money? On the other hand, supposing they knew these would cost a pretty penny, did they know where to take the money from? Who was going to pay and how? Was there nobody who knew that state, army, church, culture and generally everything belonging to a nation have to be paid only from the profit based on private property? Was there no one to know that out of that supplementary budget all the fields of civilization are kept living? Was nobody aware that people’s work potential and life conditions will be drained if one leaves nothing to the national budget? Has anybody ever thought of how they would bring about people’s physical and psychic death, if they killed them economically?
At this point, we ask: what does a man work for, if not for a better living? If he likes to hire a fiddler or to party on every holiday, he spends his spare time and extra money, not the amount necessary for his family’s survival.
However, a man’s physical power is limited. When nature made man, it did not pause to think of how strong it should make him, in order to be able to feed so many liberals, lawyers, dawdles and some other dregs of the society. Nature endowed man with enough strength to enable him to earn his living and some extra money, so that he could return to work the following day, while having some more financial means. This is to say that a worker’s spare money is too little to be placed at the disposal of civilization and of those young men bred in Paris. But why should they care about this? Do they not feel perfectly great when they impoverish honest people?
In that speech delivered to the circus, Mr. C. A. Rosetti scornfully referred to the best quality of the boyars: ‘What is a nation?’ Mr. Rosetti asked. "Forty powerful boyars and forty less powerful boyars - that is what our nation used to be when I was young". We shall mind his words. It results that our nation had to support only eighty people then. That means for every 30,000 people, there was a boyar with relatively decent demands.
These eighty people put their lives on the line all the time and they were also the ones to safeguard our country’s independence by their wisdom. They often carried out this task by sacrificing their very lives or fortunes. So, they totally compensated for all the social work supporting them.
Today, we have thousands of liberals who have never put their life in jeopardy, because no Turk, Pole or Hungarian wants to kill them. Meanwhile, they do not prove to be quite so noble and do not offer any compensation for the social work that they completely drain, by affecting the very living conditions of producers, not just their spare amounts.
A Romanian living in Transylvania is a very wise dealer. He does not need any middleman. He even does not need money. He makes two-handled tubs and wooden pails. Then he goes to Hungary and barters them for cereals. He asks for a certain quantity of cereals in exchange for a pail or a tub.
If we did the same reckoning as that Romanian in Transylvania, we could say that the thousands of kilograms of cereals equal one kilogram of liberal statements. The imported goods are equal to some kilograms of young men wasting their time abroad. Some other kilograms support our Constitution or our French laws. In short: there is a certain quantity supporting all the liberal ideas.
Private savings represent a certain amount. How can anything be left to finance a decent real education if one feeds thousands of liberal creeps by these savings? Two hundred madmen eat more than one sage.
So, our economic primer will state:
Nature gave man limited physical power, enough to support himself and his family.
He produces more than he consumes. This extra-production consists first in what he needs to multiply the conditions for the next working day, then in a small extra-production that he can place at society’s disposal by paying taxes. All the national society lives on this small extra-production of an ordinary producer.
If we are going to waste this extra-production on foreign ideas, institutions and abstract patterns (that Liberals already claim to be "entirely Romanian"), then we have nothing left for what is Romanian "indeed" or for our present national culture.