Alejandra mieles – Racial Capitalism

  1. Ruth Gilmore says that capitalism will stop being racial capitalism, when all the white people disappear from the story. What’s the connection between “whiteness” and racism, do you think?

The connection between “whiteness” and racism lies in the historical and social construction of race. Whiteness has been constructed as the norm or standard against which other races are compared, leading to the privileging of white people in society. Racism is a system of power that operates to the advantage of white people while disadvantageing non-white people. Therefore, whiteness is inherently tied to racism as it reinforces systems of power and privilege based on racial hierarchies.

  1. Gilmore makes the point that criminals are actually being created by the criminal justice and prison system (she says “the category of ‘criminal person’ can be perpetuated”). According to Gilmore, how does that happen, how does the prison system create new “criminals“? Do you agree with her view?

Ruth Gilmore argues that the criminal justice and prison system perpetuate the creation of new “criminals” through various mechanisms such as selective law enforcement, harsh sentencing policies, and inadequate social support systems. These systems disproportionately target and criminalize marginalized communities, particularly people of color and those from low-income backgrounds, leading to cycles of poverty, incarceration, and recidivism. I agree with Gilmore’s view that the prison system plays a significant role in perpetuating inequality and creating new “criminals” by failing to address underlying social issues and resorting to punitive measures instead of rehabilitation.

  1. Describe how your understand what Prof. Gilmore – in the last part of her video – calls “liberation struggle”?

“Liberation struggle,” as described by Professor Gilmore, refers to collective efforts aimed at challenging and dismantling systems of oppression and inequality. It encompasses a range of social, political, and economic actions aimed at achieving justice, equity, and liberation for marginalized communities. This may include grassroots organizing, advocacy for policy change, direct action, and solidarity across different social movements. Overall, liberation struggle seeks to transform society to create a more just and equitable world for all individuals, particularly those who have been historically marginalized and oppressed.

Alejandra Mieles – Letter to Birmingham

  1. According to MLK, how can we tell the difference between just and unjust laws? Understanding this questions is the most important part of this module, and I will ask it again during our second exam. As defined by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in “Letter to Birmingham,” “A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is “a code that is out of harmony with the moral law” (King 3). In other words, a just law is the right the vote, while an unjust law is not a real law, or even a law at all, but violation to human rights.
  2. In your view, is this an important distinction (between just and unjust laws), do you think it makes a difference in the way someone (as an individual, or our society as a whole) lives their lives? Can it affect our politics? There exists a significant differentiation between fair and unfair laws. This distinction has a profound effect on the way an individual perceives and leads their life. It is important to understand the concept of unjust laws, mostly. As Martin Luther king states in his letter, “We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was ‘legal’ and everything the Hungarian Freedom Fighters did in Hungary was ‘illegal.’ It was ‘Illegal’ to aid and comfort a jew in Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, have I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my jewish brothers” (King 4).
  3. Based on our discussion of Question 1, give an example each, of an unjust and just law, in the US today. Explain what makes it unjust or just (using MLK’s definition of those two types of laws). A just law in today’s United States is marriage equality. This law is considered just because it is inclusive to every citizen and does not promote discrimination. An example of an unjust law today is the money bail system. While it could be helpful for the wealthy, the criminal justice system often is built to tear down the humanity of people of color in low-income communities. Meaning, the system does not help those who are truly in need and tends to be unfair, not equal. So no matter the crime, money bail is a pricetag for someone’s freedom.

Alejandra Mieles- Gender

  1. What did the Supreme Court decide in the Wal-Mart case? And more importantly, how did it justify its decision? (HINT: the key word here is “commonality” (and how it related to “class-action lawsuit”). Try to understand what this legal terms means, as it is key to the court’s decision). 

“It is true that not all women employed at Wal-Mart since 1998 faced the same degree of discrimination”(1). This statement in the article, “Sex Class Action” by Dayana Tortorici, explains perfectly what happened in the Wal-Mart case. The court decided that because “the 1.5 million female Wal-Mart employees were not all denied the same promotion, the same pay raise, or insulted, belittled, or obstructed by the same manager in the same store, their cases could not legitimately be litigated all at once” (Tortorici 1). Commonality could not be presented in this case due to the 5-4 decision ratio that was delivered by Antonio Scalia, mentioned in the article. “Scalia argued that to claim ‘commonality’ a class must not only share a common problem, but also a common solution to that problem—one that would compensate all members equally in a single stroke” (Tortorici 1). 

Alejandra Mieles – The Court System

  1. In what ways is the court system better suited to protect the individual, than are the elected branches of government (such as Congress and the President; or the Mayor of NYC and the NYC City Assembly)? Give an example to illustrate your argument.

The protection of individual rights by the court system as opposed to elected officials is that judges don’t have to put any political pressure and can make decisions based on the law. It is an unbiased way to resolve legal disagreements and safeguards all parties’ constitutional entitlements. This process ensures that only the most qualified and knowledgeable individuals are appointed to the Court and that their decisions are based on legal expertise rather than political considerations.

2. Think about how federal judges get to become judges – unlike Presidents, Mayors and members of Congress (and other legislatures), they are not elected, but rather appointed. Many Americans have thus called the federal courts system, and especially the Supreme Court, anti-democratic PLACES IN OUR GOVERNMENT. Do you agree that the Supreme Court, for example, is an anti-democratic part of our government? What could be the reason for this way of choosing judges in federal courts? (HINT: think about our discussion of “Federalist #10”, and which social class plays a leading role in our government system.)

No. This distinction has been made in order to keep the judiciary separate from political influences, protecting minority rights and maintaining consistent legal standards. However, the appointment of three conservative justices during Donald Trump’s presidency shifted the court’s balance and resulted in the overturning of Roe v. Wade, which raises questions about how well the court is upholding the idea of safeguarding minority rights as outlined in Federalist #10.

Alejandra Mieles- Bill of Rights

  1. P.Williams writes in her essay, that the war on terror is a new type of war. What’s new about it, how is it different from traditional wars?

In her essay, P. Williams states, ”This concern is heightened by the fact that the war has been framed as one against “terror” – against unruly if deadly emotionalism – rather than as a war against specific bodies, specific land, specific resources” (Williams 1). This means that the enemy is not clearly defined, and the battlefield is not limited to a specific geographic area. Additionally, the tactics used in this type of war, such as suicide bombings and cyber attacks, are not traditional methods of warfare.

2. In what ways does the “Roving Wiretaps” of the Patriot Act seem to violate the Bill of Rights? Which amendment(s) does it seem to violate and why ?

The “Roving Wiretaps” of the Patriot Act permits the government to surveil and monitor individuals communications without the need for a specific warrant. This act appears to contradict the Fourth Amendment, which protects citizens against unjustified searches and seizures unless authorized by a warrant of probable cause.

3. What about “Sneek and Peek” Warrants?

“Sneak and Peek” warrants enable law enforcement to search an individual’s property without immediately notifying them of the search. This practice appears to contravene the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable searches and seizures, as well as the Fifth Amendment’s safeguard against self-incrimination. These warrants authorize searches without the need to establish probable cause before a judge, leading some to contend that they violate the Fourth Amendment.

Alejandra Mieles – Civil liberties

  1. Describe how you understand the “Establishment Clause” and the related “Lemon Test”.

The First Amendment of the US Constitution includes the Establishment Clause, which prohibits the government from endorsing any official religion or showing favoritism towards any particular religion. To determine whether a law or government action violates this clause, the Lemon test is used. This test involves three parts: the law or action must have a secular purpose, its primary effect must not be to advance or inhibit religion, and it must not create excessive entanglement between government and religion.

2. Is burning the US flag protected by the first amendment? Explain by referring to the relevant court case discussed in the reading.

Supreme Court determined that the act of burning the US flag is a type of symbolic speech that is safeguarded by the First Amendment. The decision confirmed that individuals have the right to engage in political expression, even if it is considered distasteful or disagreeable by others.

3. What does it mean when someone says “I’m taking the Fifth”?

The phrase “I’m taking the Fifth” means an individual is invoking their right to remain silent under the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution. It also serves to protects individuals from self-incrimination. Pleading the Fifth is declining to answer a question based on the possibility that their response could be used against them in a criminal proceeding.

Alejandra Mieles – Federalism

  1. Describe the primary differences in the role of citizens in government, among the federal, confederation, and unitary systems. In federalism, the term federal government refers to the government at national level, while the terms states means government at a subnational level. Power is balanced through two levels of government and they each posses the capacity to act directly on behalf of the people with authority. In confederation, authority is decentralized. This means the ability to act depends on the consent of the subnational government. Finally, unitary systems is in contrast to federalism. This system creates a subnational government where significant authority is concentrated. The primary differences in the roles of citizens lies in the distribution of power and authority between the central government and lower-level entities.
  2. Briefly explain how you understand the system of division of power. The system of division of power is designed to separate the powers of the three branches, legislative, executive, and judicial. The constitution to further protect citizens, set up a system of checks and balances. “Basically, each branch of government has a certain number of checks it can use to ensure the other branches do not become too powerful. For example, the president can veto legislation, the Supreme Court can declare acts of Congress unconstitutional, and the Senate must approve treaties and presidential appointments.” stated by the article “Overview of United States Government and Politics” by Martin Kelly.
  3. How does the federal government shape the actions of state and local governments? Write your answer based on doing a bit of research on how the federal government has influenced the actions of NY state and local governments, during the COVID-19 pandemic. During the Covid-19 pandemic, some ways the federal government influenced the actions of NY state and local governments was through policy guidelines and financial assistance. The federal government provided state governments with protocols for testing of the virus, staying up to date with vaccinations, and even provided guidelines on practicing good hygiene; which resulted in state governments to enforce these protocols through agencies such as the CDC, “Centers for Disease Control and Prevention”. The federal government also gave fundings to states and local governments, including New York, to provide relief to individuals or businesses and bolster healthcare systems.

Alejandra Mieles- The Constitution

  1. Based on the arguments presented in Readings 6.1 and 6.2, which social class wrote the Constitution, and which class was excluded and not allowed to participate in this process? In your comment, make sure you clearly specify the difference between the two classes by giving examples from the readings. In reading 6.1, “Democracy for the Few” by Michael Parenti, they identify the people of the Constitution as “just such wealthy and powerful ‘gentlemen’, our Founding Fathers.” (Parenti p.6). They excluded “poor farmers, Artisans, Indentured servants, or slaves” from “attending the convention to proffer an opposing viewpoint.” (Parenti p.9). In reading 6.2, “An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution of the United States” by Charles Beard, they identify the “Founding Fathers” as by Madison “the Republican liberty” (Beard p.1); and the working class to be excluded from politics.
  2. Would say that the social class structure of early United States society, was the same as ours today, or different? Explain. In todays society, there are very similar things in our class structure between the early United States society. An example is taxes. In the passage, “Democracy for the Few” by Michael Parenti, it states, “This process of using the taxing power to gain money from the working populace in order to bolster private fortunes continues to this day.” (Parenti p.9).
  3. Why were the people who wrote the Constitution so afraid of democracy? Hint: think about how to answer this question by discussing it in terms of social classes. The people who wrote the Constitution stated democracy to be “the worst of all Political evils.’ As Elbridge Gerry put it.” (Parenti p.8). This was because they believed democracy would give to much power to the people of society in having some rule and opinion in politics. In, “Democracy for the Few” by Michael Parenti, “Roger Sherman concurred: ‘The people should have as little to do as may be about the Government’ (Parenti p.8).

Alejandra Mieles- The Federalist Papers

  1. What concept that we have already discussed does “faction” remind you of? In “Federalist #10” by James Madison, the text argues that by “faction,” he means a group of citizens who come together based on a shared interest or passion, which may be in conflict with the interests of others or the overall well-being of the community. A concept that reminds me of this is the democratic and republican parties during the early years of America. They represented distinct factions with differing views on the role of government and other issues. As stated in the reading, “It may be concluded that a pure democracy…can adopt of no cure for the mischiefs of faction” and “A republic, by which I mean a government…opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking.”
  2. According to Federalist #10 (written by James Madison), what is the source of wealth (private property)? What factor explains why some people get to possess wealth by owning private property, and others don’t (thus remaining poor)? This is a key question, because it shows how the authors of the Constitution thought about the difference between different classes of Americans! HINT: focus on the passage that begins: “The diversity in the faculties (WHAT DOES FACULTIES mean or refer to?) of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not les….” According to “Federalist #10”, James Madison states, “The diversity in the faculties of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not less an insuperable obstacle to a uniformity of interests.” Madison acknowledged that individuals naturally form factions based on different interest or concerns, but he did not identify one class to be wealthy. Instead he identifies an unequal distribution of property due to a division in society in interests and parties, leading to some citizens remaining poor. Madison then states, “The inference to which we are brought is that the causes of faction cannot be removed, and that relief is only to be sought in the means of controlling its effects.” and suggesting the republican party to be the cure for the “mischiefs of faction”.
  3. Do you agree with this explanation of wealth and poverty? From my perspective, I disagree with the statement as it diverts attention from what makes the system unequal. It provides an excuse to inequalities, suggesting that due to solely our differences in talents, skills, or capabilities, some individuals are not entitled to the same opportunities as others. However, the reality is that we may possess similar qualifications or skills to others, yet the color of our skin can overshadow our abilities and qualifications.
  4. What is the core mission (“first object”) of the US government? Does this surprise you, does it sound different from what our society today seems to suggest the core mission of the government is? Explain. The US government’s primary mission is to protect the interests of the propertied class and maintain the existing class structure. Its focus is on safeguarding the accumulation of wealth, rather than ensuring the welfare of the majority. This does not surprise me, Americas concern has always been the protection of the wealthy and their influence.
  5. Given the discussion in questions 1-4, are you surprised that Federalist #10 is not in favor of democracy, and supports a Republican (representative) form of government? Why would d the author dislike a (pure) democratic form of government? Hint: think about how this question connects with the social classes… In “Federalist #10”, Madison believed democracy could cause turbulence and lead to the propertyless majority rising against the propertied class, which could upset the existing social order. It is not surprising as the reader to know he was in favor of the republican class.

Alejandra Mieles- Concentration of capital

  1. Which statistic on wealth inequality in the US (discussed on p. 29) made the biggest impression on you? Explain why? The statistic that laborers would never be paid their essential value surprises me the most. Although it make sense for the capitalist, it is unfair to the worker. This might be fact, but what is also a fact is that, capital can not exist without labor.
  2. What could be some of the implications of living in a society that has such huge wealth inequalities? Do you see this dynamic getting played out in everyday life in our society? How so? Example? Some implications of living a wealth inequality society is that wealthy individuals and corporations may influence political processes and policies. This is definitely played out in society. Wealthy individuals are often able to contribute to policies through their connections.