Herbert Adolphus Miller

Race and Class Parallelism

IT has been a popular form of experiment lately to try to select cigarettes when blindfolded. The result has generally demonstrated that the popularity of various brands of cigarettes has been built on their labels rather than on their taste. This does not prove that there may not be differences in the tobacco, but the differences are not evident to the taste, which is considered to be the one thing that counts in such matters. In estimates of race much the same situation prevails. Qualities that we thought were inherently different are really not discoverable if we are blindfolded. To be sure, just as with the tobacco, there may be differences, but they are not the differences we have thought them to be. Every day it becomes more difficult to tell what a race is. It is almost an hypothetical concept, of which something may be left after the characteristics which have generally been called racial are explained, without the necessity of using race as an explanation. Such analyses of the problem are proceeding in many directions. The purpose of this paper is to study the label race in terms of class. Many of our concepts of race were lifted bodily from older notions of class which were thoroughly crystallized long before there was any popular notion of race in the present sense with which it is used. In other words, what we call the race problem is, to a very large degree, the mere inheritance of vocabulary and attitudes which prevailed when class organization was the accepted order of society. CLASS ORGANIZATION

The Group as an Instinct

Importance of group life. An individual is never an isolated being, psychologically, reactions being controlled by law, psychological law. Wars and conflicts grew out of the nature and relationship of groups. Group life is not evil but may be good. The group impulse is an instinct. Instinct of the group. Instinct is a product of evolution. The generalized social instinct is not enough to account for the facts. The survival of ones country is sweeter than the survival of ones self on account of this instinct. Group not fixed. Sight, smell, and hearing identify the group which may be tribe, religious group, or nation, but is not a fixed entity. Loyalty is instinctive. Gregariousness is the sublimation of a prior group instinct. Hatred of groups proves its instinctive quality. We do not know that we belong to complicated groups. Patriotism is the emotional side of the group instinct. We react to the group relationship unconsciously because it is normal and natural.

ROCKER, RUDOLF. Nationalism and Cul ture. Pp. 574. New York: Covici, Friede, Inc., 1937.

the meaning of &dquo;crisis,&dquo; the second lecture on the history of democracy in prewar Europe, the third lecture on democracy during the war, the fourth on postwar dictatorships, or the fifth on postwar democracies. The final chapter is particularly disappointing. The rich literature of recent analysis and controversy has raised many fundamental questions. Most of them are itemized, or dismissed with casual phrases. If this book had been published in 1933, it would have been more needed. Today, it is just another book. HAROLD D. LASSWELL

3.50

concrete and permanent definition of a nation. It usually has some geographical relations, but may exist without them; it may inhere in a consciousness of blood relationship, but aliens may be adopted into it; it may turn on tradition and history, but myth may be just as effective; it may claim high moral justification and purpose, but an analysis of its history may show that it came into existence by ruthless injustice. A nation is merely

The Nationalistic Epidemic

STRAIN, full of the implications of war, characterized the relationships of the great powers of Europe before 1914, but the casus belli was the act of a youth who belonged to one of the minority peoples of Austria-Hungary. The assassination of the Crown Prince was the overt expression of a feeling that prevailed widely and deeply in every non-German people of the Empire and was paralleled in many other countries of Europe. The peace treaty tried to settle such problems once for all by adopting the Wilsonian principle of &dquo;self-determination,&dquo; through a remaking of boundaries and the establishment of a Section on Mi-

The Menace of Minorities

matters are disposed of in rather emphatic language with limited and inconclusive evidence. The sentences quoted above offer a good example. It is readily admitted that the British system of employment exchanges has its deficiencies. It is admitted also that most of the time of the staff has been consumed in administering benefits, keeping records, etc. But what ground is there in fact for the assertion that &dquo;so few of the potential benefits of the Employment Exchanges have been realized ?&dquo; Language to pretty much the same effect is found at many points scattered throughout the volume, but nowhere does the author become specific and give the reader a bill of particulars or state in just what additional ways the exchanges could have functioned. The primary function of exchanges is to prevent leakage and to make proper placements; they can do little directly to increase the number of jobs. Have not most vacancies been filled rather promptly by the exchanges or otherwise, especially during the post-war period? One difficulty has been that many employers have not notified their vacancies to the exchanges. This can be cured only by compulsory notification, which may be desirable, but is not dependent upon the presence or absence of government-administered unemployment insurance. The author is adversely critical of the many changes made in the insurance system in 19~1 and later. Certainly the system of insurance was undermined, and this will be vigorously criticised by all who have the professional insurance man’s point of view. But did not the concrete situation call for what was done, though it was inadequate, rather than for full reliance upon ordinary poor relief? The reviewer would agree with the position taken by the authors of The Third Winter of Unemployment rather than with that taken by Mr. Morley. The system of unemployment insurance

Hullinger, Edwin Ware. The Reforging of Russia. Pp. 402. Price,

It is not at all clear just where the individual merges into the social, but we have become familiar with the contrast between Individualism and Socialism, and everyone has a fairly good idea of what is meant by the two terms. We are beginning to see that men are more closely related to the groups to which they belongfamily, community, and religious organization-than to any interest which could be more specifically called merely personal. The object of this paper is to show that there is a rapidly developing individualism that is distinctly social, and which promises to become a powerful factor in human affairs. The earlier conflict between Socialism and Individualism is likely to be diverted to that between Socialism and Nationalism or the struggle for national individuality. At the present moment the world is organizing itself into two great camps-Socialism and Nationalism. Both are expressions of the group feeling; both are movements of revolt; both are struggles for freedom. They started from a common impulse about fifty ears ago, but quickly found themselves arrayed against each other. One would break down political boundaries; the other would build them up. Socialism calls all the world one; Nationalism sets part against the rest. Socialism is economic; Nationalism sentimental. Both are rapidly becoming world-wide and must fundamentally modify statescraft. Socialism is one of the world-movements accepted as an actuality. It has a program which seeks more or less clearly defined results. But National Individualism looms on the horizon as an equally extensive expression of human association which cannot fail to be a temporary check to the realization of the ideal of the socialist. It has sprung into being in its present form so rapidly that it has been difficult to recognize it as one of the most potent forms