Given a twenty-year sentence for war crimes, he died the following autumn at Aiud Prison, shortly before the establishment of a communist regime that suppressed his publications for the more than four decades of its existence.

Nonetheless, he argued in favor of complete Jewish assimilation, including "long processes of interbreeding" with Romanians and a renewed social organization, based on the "division of labor" (with references to Conta and Émile Durkheim).

[38] At the time, his adversaries at Glasul Bucovinei suggested that, though he spoke vehemently for both antisemitism and anti-Zionism, and though he condemned all parties, including Averescu's, as taken over by the Jews, Brăileanu had failed to also attack his lawyer friend Constantin Rădulescu—just as Rădulescu was representing the Jewish students in court.

[46] Historian Armin Heinen contrarily suggests that he was only a member from 1930;[47] according to Glasul Bucovinei, Brăileanu had partnered up with the LANC's Gheorghe Vitriescu in the municipal elections of March 1930, helping him spread "racial hatred and animosity among citizens".

[28] Possibly radicalized under the influence of racial eugenicist Iordache Făcăoaru,[50] Brăileanu's views on minority issues were recast into a scientifically racist sociological theory, which postulated that Jews were not capable of being integrated into any other nation.

[51] His support for racial determinism led him to conclude that "the variation of social types" was only a historical action of environmental and demographic factors, and that, in all other respects, individuals of the same race were identical.

[53] Writing in 1936 for Marta Rădulescu's Revista Mea, he demanded a neo-traditionalist and nationalist revival in Romanian art, placed in service to "the Church and the State", and rejecting "kike commercialism".

[54] According to literary historian Rodica Ilie, his call to "purge Romanian society of corrupting influences" was a "trope" shared by extreme nationalists and communists of the day, the latter of whom targeted "bourgeois seductions" rather than "Jewish spirituality".

Brăileanu's translation of the Critique of Pure Reason appeared in 1930,[26] being hailed by philosopher Tudor Vianu as one of the prime achievements of its era,[56] but criticized by Ernest Bernea as "confusing" and "fragmentary".

[60] Brăileanu ultimately became the unchallenged leader of a sociological school at Cernăuți, akin to those led by Dimitrie Gusti at Bucharest, Virgil Bărbat at Cluj and Petre Andrei at Iași.

[62] Brăileanu's articles there combined a condemnation of the multi-party system with the theory of "Judaeo-communist revolution", arguing that the former would inevitably lead to the latter, and proposed instead a corporate state headed by the Guard.

[63] Leon Volovici concludes that Însemnări Sociologice "did not differ from Legionary propaganda", with its ample references to "the Internationale of the yids", anti-Masonic lore, and calls for racial segregation ("complete, biological and spiritual separation from the Jews").

[64] Brăileanu himself proudly acknowledged that there was little difference between his Guardist credo and his sociological work, describing Însemnări Sociologice as providing "Legionary doctrine" with "all the support of social science".

"[65] Brăileanu's writings, including his articles in teachers' magazines,[66] shifted toward developing a Romanian "elite theory" and the role of state pedagogy in cultivating a fresh political establishment.

[68] Invoking the examples set by Italian fascism and Nazism, Brăileanu argued that educating the masses to accept leadership and social selection "without a murmur" was far more beneficial than perpetuating universal suffrage.

[70] Like the rest of the Guard, Brăileanu found himself in conflict with King Carol II and the political factions who supported him, leading to a series of violent clashes and retaliatory murders.

Although by then a secondary figure, cut off from the major political centers,[75] Brăileanu was deeply involved in its creation, in recruiting youth, and in organizing charity campaigns, his activities closely monitored by the Romanian Police.

Writing in Însemnări Sociologice in January 1938, Brăileanu complained that the PNC's antisemitic program was incomplete, since it failed to target liberal democracy, "that which has made kikes all-powerful".

[90] A month later, the FRN dictatorship crumbled, and Carol II abdicated; the Guard seized the opportunity and proclaimed its National Legionary State, with Ion Antonescu as the Conducător.

[91] The staff he appointed also included other Guard affiliates: Făcăoaru, Haig Acterian, Vasile Băncilă, Dan Botta, Eugen Chirnoagă, Vladimir Dumitrescu, and Radu Gyr.

[103] Brăileanu annoyed Antonescu by insisting on minute details of cultural and religious policy: he wanted to rename villages whose name still honored Ion G. Duca, demanded the removal of frescoes depicting Carol II, and also proposed to shut down the Bucharest Crematorium, which he saw as anti-Christian.

[104] According to various reports, his Ministry encouraged the display of propaganda material in high schools, allowing teachers to put up portraits of the Guard's assassinated founder, Corneliu Zelea Codreanu.

[124] Together with Sima and Herseni, Brăileanu sought to establish full Guardist control over cultural institutes such as Accademia di Romania, but their moves were vetoed by Antonescu, who favored a more conservative approach.

[127] Horrified by the Guard's assassinations of Iorga and Virgil Madgearu, in late November, he again tendered his resignation, but was persuaded to reverse his decision—allegedly, he agreed so that he could spare the country even greater chaos.

[137] In December 1942, when rumors spread that Sima was preparing to return from exile with Nazi support, Brăileanu was re-arrested, alongside some 1,500 other Guard figures, and interned at the Târgu Jiu camp.

[141] In 1944, the official publishing company, Casa Școalelor, issued his Romanian version of the Nicomachean Ethics—according to literary critic Adrian Marino, it was a "failed attempt", and "downright impossible".

"[143] Following the King Michael Coup of August 1944, General Nicolae Rădescu, soon to become prime minister, pointed to Brăileanu as among those guilty of the "national disaster" that had befallen the country.

[144] At the time, the Communist Party organ, Scînteia, described Brăileanu as "flushed out, disjointed, his baldness sowed with grey bristle hairs as on a worn-out brush, his mouth toothless, words emerging inconsistent, gelatinous".

[156] Brăileanu's nephew Virgil Procopovici survived both his jailing under Antonescu and a renewed communist imprisonment from 1948, and, in 1999, reemerged as a legatee of the Iron Guard, republishing Guardist literature that he had kept hidden for the previous 50 years.

[137] A new edition of his uncle's Nicomachean Ethics appeared at Editura Antet in on around 2005; scholar Alexander Baumgarten criticized this editorial decision, noting that the translation had since been superseded by Stella Petrecel's (itself published in 1988).