Trencsényi Balázs et al.: Nation-building and contested identities: Romanian and Hungarian Case Studies (Budapest, 2002)

Part 1. Modernity and national identity: approaches, dilemmas, legacies

Balázs Trencsényi 23 Zeletin, Burghezia romána. Neoliberalismul, pp. 426-427. 24 Zeletin, Burghezia romána. Neoliberalismul, p. 429. 25 Zeletin, Burghezia romána. Neoliberalismul, p. 154. 26 Zeletin, Burghezia romána. Neoliberalismul, p. 266. 27 Zeletin, Burghezia romána. Neoliberalismul, p. 154. 28 Zeletin, Burghezia romána. Neoliberalismul, p. 268. 29 Zeletin, Burghezia romána. Neoliberalismul, p. 176. 3­1 Zeletin, Burghezia romána. Neoliberalismul, p. 424. 31 Zeletin, Burghezia romána. Neoliberalismul, p. 437. 32 On Manoilescu’s ideas, see Philippe C. Schmitter, “Reflections on Mihail Manoilescu and the Political Consequences of Delayed-Dependent Develop­ment on the Periphery of Western Europe,” in Jowitt ed., Social Change in Romania, 1860-1940, pp. 117-139. 33 In an undated anecdote recorded by Petre Tutea, Zeletin asserted that he joined this party not because it had a splendid future, but because the whole Academy of Sciences was there, and it was a pleasant company, while the lib­erals had a “great future,” but were a bit disgusting “from inside:” peddlars, “smelling of bránzá.” See C.D. Zeletin’s biographical introduction to Zeletin, Burghezia romána. Neoliberalismul, p. 19. 34 Roberts, Rumania, pp. 67-85. 35 See Irina Livezeanu, Cultural Politics in Greater Romania: Regionalism, Nation Building & Ethnic Struggle, 1918-30 (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1995). 78

Next