Food supply in relation to population is obviously determined by the growth, positive or negative, of both factors. Differences in their growths will alter the ratio of the one to the other; this ratio we call per capita food supply which, over longer periods, is the same as per capita food consumption. We may take it for granted that both population and food supply will continue to show positive growth in the near and more distant future.
As long as one man depends for his success, whether financial success or some other gain, on another man's failure, he will almost inevitably employ any excuse--race, religion, language, culture--to make the other man's failure more certain. Prejudice is thus the symptom of a disease, not the disease itself.
The history of splinter groups in the American radical movement points to a variety of reasons why Marxism has so far failed to become a major force in United States politics. The most important reasons have been the tendency toward 'personalism' in the radical groups; their narrow concepts of orthodoxy and party discipline, in contrast to the general indifference of the major political parties to these matters; their tendency to quarrel among themselves over points of doctrine; and their excessive concentration on events abroad rather than on problems that are vital to the welfare of the United States.
The Soviet form of government is most easily understood as a kind of theocracy resting on the atheist religion of salvation which is Marxism. These are not analogies, they are definitions. They require explanation.
It is now more than sixteen years since Franklin Roosevelt saw 'one-third of a nation ill-housed.' In the intervening period hundreds of public housing projects have been constructed under the auspices of the federal government, and state and local governments as well. Nevertheless, public housing programs remain under attack, not only by the 'vested interests'--realtors, landlords, and private builders--but also by person less intimately affected.
[on Hinkle's paper in 19:4] Perhaps Dr. Gisela Hinkle’s interpretations [Dec. 1952 edition of Social Research] of some of the theories of W.I. Thomas are unnecessarily narrow, that they overlook certain important considerations, and that further clarification is needed on some points if the merits of the argument are to be appreciated.
An extensive discussion of Telford Taylor’s book, Sword and Swastika.
Review of book by the International Bank. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press. 1952. 463 pp.
Review of book by Norman J. G. Pounds. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. 1952. 283 pp.
Review of book by Melvin M. Tumin. Princeton: Princeton University Press. 1952. 300 pp.
Review of book by Hans Aufricht.New York: Columbia University Press. 1951. 682 pp