Autocracy and Democracy are mutually antagonistic. A dictatorship, whether that of the proletariat or one established by a totalitarian state, is a menace to popular government. We have all seen in the recent past how it has shown itself a foe to liberty; to freedom of the person, freedom of opinion and speech, freedom of the press, and hostile to religious toleration. Autocracy, relying upon force, is necessarily militaristic and readily assumes an aggressive attitude towards other forms of government.

The term “refugee” is generally held to refer to those who have left or been forced to leave their country for political reasons, who have been deprived of its diplomatic protection and have not acquired the nationality or diplomatic protection of any other state. This includes those from whom the state has taken away protection and assistance but without suppressing juridically their nationality, and those whom the state has deprived of their nationality, thus making them stateless. While in strict law the position of these different categories of refugees is not uniform, in practice it is identical.

Despite a rather wide range of disagreement among National Socialist writers, a general, characteristic National Socialist theory of international law is definitely discernible. Hans Helmut Dietze is perhaps the most representative and certainly among the most thoroughly National Socialist writers on this subject. Helmut Nicolai, Ernst Wolgast, Norbert Gürke, Herbert Kraus, and G. A. Walz may be considered as ranking next in importance from the point of view of expounding the most typical National Socialist doctrines in the field of international law. The words and deeds of the Fuhrer have formed, of course, the basis upon which these doctrines stand. Although the utterances as well as the actions of Hitler have not always been consistent (this is obvious in any comparison of Mein Kampf with his speeches as Reichskanzler), this fact does not seem greatly to have hindered the formulation of an international legal theory, but then this theory itself may appear to many, when viewed objectively, as likewise inconsistent. However, just as it is possible to dismiss certain statements of Hitler as embodying words coined more for tactical purposes and not sincerely in line with National Socialist ideology, so it is possible to see through many of the inconsistencies in the National Socialist theories on international law and obtain the real volklich-nationale point of view.

The significance of international short wave broadcasting has been enhanced recently by a sequence of apparently unrelated international developments, both political and technical in character. These developments, with their widespread ramifications, place additional strains on the international radio regulatory régime built up during the last three decades. This regulatory pattern has evolved out of some of the most voluminous, intricate, and technical multilateral treaties to be put in force between sovereign states.

Though general interest in the advisory opinions of the Permanent Court of International Justice has waned of late because of the decline in the Court’s advisory activity and the dormancy of the question of American adherence, there are questions relating to the advisory work of the Court which still command the interest of the serious student. On January 26, 1937, the Council of the League referred to the special committee set up to study the application of the principles of the Covenant the question of the conditions of voting requests for advisory opinions. As appears from the observations of governments as well as from the discussions in the Council and Assembly, the question of the vote necessary to a request for an advisory opinion raises the larger question of the nature of advisory opinions.