In a comparative study of Bolshevist and National Socialist theories of international law the initial inquiry is whether the term itself expresses an inherent contradiction: whether something called the Bolshevist or the National Socialist doctrine of international law can exist at all. There is no 'pre-established harmony' between the respective totalitarian 'philosophies' and the categories of legal knowledge. Indeed, totalitarianism in all its varieties is essentially alien to an adequate approach to the theory of international law. This has not, however, led to an outright abolition of international law research in these totalitarian states. The dictatorships could not suffer the free existence of this branch of science, but rather undertook to amalgamate it with their general ideology. Hence all the compromises, falsifications and renunciations which we shall see presently.
John R. Hicks’ Value and Capital performs only the first part of a reorganization of the body of economic knowledge: that pertaining to the 'economics of the short run.' I should like to convince him that what is published is only the first volume, and that we expect him to complete the reorganizing work in a second volume. Modern theory of the 'capitalistic' system is based on three cornerstones: first, formal descriptions of the consumer’s scales of preference; second, analysis of the entrepreneur’s tendencies to maximize profits; third, analysis of the way in which the uncertainty of actual life is met by outlining 'plans,' and of the modifications to which a plan is subjected under the influence of current experience. In the following remarks these basic problems will be considered separately.
In the flood of books and articles concerning Austria which have followed Hitler’s despoliation of that beautiful little country and its charming people, few have been so interesting and thought-provoking as Dr. Ernst Karl Winter’s discussion of 'The Rise and Fall of Austrian labor' in the September 1939 issue of Social Research. As was to be expected, his article is crammed with interesting facts, shrewd and enlightening comments, and subtle and ingenious arguments. The present writers were particularly gratified to notice that some conclusions they had reached independently are shared by Dr. Winter. Just because of the general excellence of his presentation, however, it seems all the more imperative to submit additional evidence which supports the opinion that parts of his exposition and conclusions are questionable…
The writer on Edmund Husserl’s philosophy has not to conjure a great shade, but to acknowledge the living and enlivening impulse which -- under the designation 'phenomenology' -- unites Husserl’s German disciples, dispersed throughout the civilized world, with a growing number of foreign friends. Husserl did not establish a school or a system, nor did he wish to. His was the force to start a movement. This force derived its impetus from the radicalism of his search, which never indulged in any preconception, even of his own making. It derived its breadth from the richness of his intuition and from his progressive revision and assimilation of true historical motives.
The fact that New York City is a metropolis of many nationalities, cultures and religions has a special bearing on the number and types of its workers’ schools. The aim of the study of which the present paper is an abstract was to find the essential characteristics of works’ education in New York, and also to clarify its relation to adult education. Thus special emphasis was given to methods of teaching and to the closely connected question of the selection of subject matter.
Review of book by Albrecht Mendelssohn Bartholdy. New Haven: Yale University Press. 1937. 300 pp.
Review of book by Raymond Aron. Paris: Joseph Vrin. 1938. 325 pp.
Review of book by Carl T. Schmidt. New York: Oxford University Press. 1939. 173 pp.
Review of book by Malcolm P. McNair and Howard T. Lewis. Papers by members of the faculty of the Graduate School of Business Administration, Harvard University. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. 1938. 411 pp.
Review of book by Raymond J. Saulnier. New York: Columbia University Press. 1938. 403 pp.
Review of book by J. Wilner Sundelson. Albany. New York State Tax Commission, Special Report No. 14. 1938. 640 pp.
Review of book by Hans Neisser. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 1936. 176 pp.
Review of book by Karen Horney. New York: Norton. 1939. 313 pp.
Review of book by Hortense Powdermaker. New York: Viking. 1939. 408 pp.