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?

I think that although Ruth Gilmore says that capitalism and racism are connected, and “whiteness” is acting as a tool to maintain racial hierarchies and economic inequality, whiteness here isn’t just about skin color—it’s about the power and privilege that give certain groups superiority over others. According to her even if white people “disappeared from the story”, capitalism would still be a racist system because it prospers on inequality and hierarchies. Being white or “whiteness”, in this sense, is just an excuse to wrongfully  justify and normalize racism in the system.

• 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?

Gilmore explains that the prison system keeps itself going by always expanding what counts as a crime, giving longer sentences, and making it hard for people to rejoin society after prison. It also targets vulnerable groups, like those affected by poverty and racism, to keep the cycle of incarceration alive and profit from it. I agree with this claim because it shows how the system pushes for this agenda and it is not just an action of individuals.

• Describe how your understand what Prof. Gilmore – in the last part of her video – calls “liberation struggle”
  The way I understand what Prof. Gilmore calls “liberation struggle” is liberation that starts in local communities, where people resist oppression and build systems based on care and togetherness. It’s about learning from history, organizing, and working together to challenge systems like racism and colonialism. Her example of Lisbon communities fighting to save their homes shows how liberation is about solidarity, debate, and rethinking how we live together with justice at the core of all things.

The Supreme Court ruled against the plaintiffs (accusers) in the Betty Dukes v. Walmart Stores, Inc. case, ending the largest civil rights class action lawsuit in American history. The court ruled in that way because the plaintiffs failed to meet the “commonality” requirement for a class-action lawsuit. In other words, the plaintiffs couldn’t prove that all of Walmart female employees experienced the same type of discrimination, and their evidence wasn’t strong enough to show that there is a company-wide policy of discrimination against women.

1. The court system, especially the Supreme Court, is better at protecting individual rights than elected branches like Congress or the President because it’s less tied to politics and public opinion. Justices are appointed for life, so they don’t have to worry about reelection or making decisions just to stay popular. This gives them the freedom to focus on what the Constitution says instead of what voters or interest groups want. Additionally, the Court’s whole job is to interpret the law and the Constitution, which is often about protecting people’s rights, even when it’s unpopular. Elected officials, on the other hand, usually go with what the majority wants because that’s how they keep their jobs. For example, in Brown v. Board of Education (1954), Politicians were too scared to push back against segregation because it wasn’t a popular move at the time. The Supreme Court stepped in and declared segregation in schools unconstitutional, protecting the rights of Black students. In other words, the courts are designed to look out for individuals and minority groups when the majority or the government isn’t doing the right thing.

2.I do think that the Supreme Court is somewhat anti-democratic in the sense that justices aren’t elected buy appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, and they get to serve for life. Unlike Presidents or members of Congress, they don’t have to answer to voters, for good (like in my answer for question #1 and bad). With that said, I think there’s a reason it’s set up this way. In Federalist #10, Madison talks about protecting against the “tyranny of the majority”, by keeping judges independent from elections, they can focus on the Constitution and the law instead of trying to stay popular. However, the President and Senators, who pick and approve these judges, often come from wealthy or elite backgrounds, so the judges they choose can possibly reflect those same upper-class agendas. It’s a reminder that even though the courts are supposed to be neutral and unbiased, our government is still heavily influenced by the interests of the elite.

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

According to P. Williams, the War on Terror is a new type kind of war because it’s about fighting an idea and not a specific country or clear enemy. The war against “terrorism,” is very broad and basically means a war against “anything that makes us afraid.” Williams calls it a “war of the mind,” which indicates that fear and not facts is a main reason for this war. This unclear enemy means anyone who the authority find suspicious can be targeted, giving the government more power to monitor, use surveillance, detain, and silence people, even if they haven’t done anything wrong all in the name of preventing “possible” threats.

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” section of the Patriot Act is violating the rights of the Fourth Amendment. The Fourth Amendment supposed to protect people from unreasonable searches and requires the government to be specific about what they’re searching and where. However, with “Roving Wiretaps”, a single court approval can cover multiple devices a suspect might use such as phone, tablet, computer, and any additional device of the same type, without naming each one in the warrant. Additionally, the government can monitor anyone who just happens to interact with the suspect, even if they’re not involved in anything suspicious. Although “Roving Wiretaps”, suppose to help catch people involved with terrorists, this section in the Patriot Act could possibly lead to innocent people getting spied on, which is clearly an invasion of privacy.

3. What about “Sneak and Peek” Warrants?

The “Sneak and Peek” warrants of the Patriot Act also violate the Fourth Amendment. which aim to protect people from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. Normally, if the government wants to search any personal items, they must have a warrant and inform the person, but with “Sneak and Peek” warrants, the government can search a person’s place without letting them know right away, which seems shady and clearly contradicts the Fourth Amendment. Although, in the beginning, “Sneak and Peek” Warrants were supposed to be used only for serious cases such as terrorism, where informing suspects could mess up the investigation, it is now allowing the government to use “Sneak and Peek” Warrants for any crime minor or major as long as it of interest to the law enforcement authorities. Obviously, this uncontrolled power, makes people worry it could be negatively abused by the government, crossing the line on privacy and transparency that the Fourth Amendment is supposed to protect them from.

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

The “Establishment Clause” is an important part of the First Amendment, that prevents from the Congress to favor one religion over another and ensures that the Congress won’t create a state-sponsored religion. The idea for the implementing the Establishment Clause comes from the history of European religious conflicts, where countries usually had an official and specific church. The lack of separation between church and state and favoring one specific religion in Europe led to many wars because of religious differences between the countries. Therefore, the U.S., who values religious freedom, needed to avoid establishing a central national religion in order to prevent the same conflicts that happen in Europe, from happening in the U.S.. Additionally, the interpretation of “Establishment Clause” throughout the years helped with making sure the government stays neutral toward religion and non-religion. To help the U.S. government understand if a law or action is contradicting the Establishment Clause and to create barriers to ensure this Clause is not being violated, the Supreme Court established the “Lemon Test” in a case known as Lemon v. Kurtzman in 1971.

The Lemon Test includes 3 parts to determine if a law or action is violating the Establishment Clause:

(1) The law must have a secular purpose

(2) The law cannot promote or favor any religion

(3) The law must avoid excessive government connections with religion.

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

Yes, burning the U.S. flag is protected by the First Amendment as free speech, because of the Supreme Court decision in the Texas v. Johnson case in 1989. Gregory Lee Johnson burned a U.S. flag during a protest near the Republican National Convention in Texas and was charged with the Texan law: “desecration of a venerated object”. Johnson claimed that the act of burning the flag was a symbolic way of delivering a message, and basically a way of speech. In this case, The Supreme Court decided that even though act of burning the U.S flag is offensive to many people, it’s still protected under the First Amendment, because it’s a form of expression of speech. However, the majority of the Congress did not agree with this decision and tried to overrule it with the Flag Protection Act. In 1990, the Supreme Court shut it down again as part of the  United States v. Eichman case. In fact, since 1990, people tried to amend the Constitution to allow flag burning bans to become a law, but it never worked.

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

 When someone says, “I’m taking the Fifth,” it means they are using their Fifth Amendment right to avoid self-incrimination, indicating they are rather not to say anything that might make them look guilty in a criminal case. It is important to mention that, if someone refuses to answer questions by “taking the Fifth”, it cannot be used against them in court by assuming they are guilty just because they chose to take the Fifth and not talk.

Discussion Board 7.1

1. Describe the primary differences in the role of citizens in government, among the federal, confederation, and unitary systems.

The primary differences in the role of citizens in government among federal, confederation, and unitary systems are:

• In a federal system, citizens participate in both national and subnational governments, with clear responsibilities at each level. For example, in the U.S., citizens elect representatives to Congress and the president at the national level, while also electing state legislators and governors in the state level. This participation in both national and state elections gives citizens influence over both local and national governments. Federal systems divide power between levels.
• In a confederation, citizens engage with their state governments, which has more power than the central government which is weak and relies on the consent of the subnational governments. Therefore, Citizens’ influence on national decisions is limited, because the central authority is acting according to the state’s decisions. Confederations maximize regional power
• In a unitary system, citizens mainly interact with the national government, where most authority is held. Local governments, if there are any at all, are very dependent on the central authority. Additionally, Citizens may have some roles at the local state level, but the more significant decisions are only made by the central national government. Unitary systems centralize authority in the national government.

2. Briefly explain how you understand the system of division of power.

• The system of division of power in the U.S. is the system the divides the authority between 4 branches: legislative, executive, and judicial. This system aims to prevent any one of the branches from being too powerful by setting checks and balances, where each branch monitors and limits the actions of the other branches. For example, the president (executive branch) can veto laws passed by Congress (legislative branch), but Congress can override the veto with a two-thirds majority. additionally, the judicial branch can review laws or executive actions.

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, the federal government significantly influenced the actions of New York state by funding, guidelines, and emergency measures.
  • The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, which provided federal funds to help states like New York manage the economic crisis that came with the COVID-19 pandemic. New York received aid worth billions of dollars to assist hospitals, providing unemployment benefits, and help small businesses. This financial support allowed NY state to set health measures, provide healthcare services, and stabilize its economy. (https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/coronavirus , https://www.nysed.gov/federal-education-covid-response-funding/cares-act-allocations-and-application-information ).
  • The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) issued health guidelines on mask-wearing, social distancing, and vaccination. New York State could decide how to apply these guidelines, federal recommendations shaped the state’s pandemic policies. Governor Andrew Cuomo adopted many federal health directives and modified them according to NY state needs. (https://www.cdc.gov/covid/index.html, https://www.nyc.gov/site/doh/covid/covid-19-main.page )
  • President Biden’s vaccine requirement for federal employees, influenced New York’s own vaccination campaigns. For example, New York enforced vaccination or testing mandates for state employees and healthcare workers. (https://www.whitehouse.gov/covidplan/ , https://hca-nys.org/vaccine-requirements-for-nyc-contracted-staff-including-home-care-and-other-covid-19-briefs/#:~:text=State%20Worker%20Vaccination%20Requirement&text=Cuomo%20announced%20that%20New%20York,COVID%2D19%20by%20Labor%20Day. )

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.

According to the readings 6.1 and 6.2 the social class who wrote the Constitution were the elite class—white male who were wealthy landowners, merchants, and politicians who aimed to protect their interests. The lower class was excluded. These were the nonwhites, poor farmers, women, enslaved people (slaves and indentured servants). They didn’t have political rights and wealth, and they were not represented properly. Many men were disenfranchised due to property requirements, and women, nonwhites and enslaved people (slaves and indentured servants) didn’t have voting rights at all.

2. Would say that the social class structure of early United States society, was the same as ours today, or different? Explain.

In my opinion, the social class structure of early American society was very different from today class structure. Many individuals, such as enslaved people (slaves and indentured servants), women, and men without property, were legally excluded from voting and didn’t have political representation. The elite class was mostly composed of wealthy landowners and merchants, and today’s structure has layers like the upper, middle, and working classes. Additionally, today there is much more awareness for social justice, which almost did not exist in early America.

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 of the Constitution (mostly wealthy and influential white men) were afraid of democracy because they thought the masses (especially the poor) would threaten their property and economic interests by challenging their authority and rebel against them. The founding fathers wished to create a government that is democratic is also protected against uncontrolled majority power.

1. What concept that we have already discussed does “faction” remind you of?

The concept of “faction” in Federalist Paper No. 10 reminds me the Marxism Capitalist.  Both say that social divisions come from competing interests, mostly economic ones. Both also acknowledge that these conflicts can lead to fight for power, with factions or classes fighting for their own interests at the expense of others. Lastly, both they show how economic interests shape political dynamics and contribute to social differences.

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 FACULTIESmean or refer to?) of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not les….”

In Federalist Paper No. 10, Madison identifies the source of wealth is the right to own property. He explains that the rights to property comes from the diversity in the faculties of men, meaning that individuals possess different abilities, talents, and skills that allow them to acquire and manage property in different ways. This is also the factor that explains why some people possess wealth by owning private property. The rich have access for education, resources, and rights that protects their interests. while the poor don’t, which makes the rich more likely to succeed in gaining wealth, while the poor may find it more challenging, resulting in unequal distributions of wealth.

3. Do you agree with this explanation of wealth and poverty?

I agree that individual differences in talents and skills can influence economic success. With that said, this simplifies wealth and poverty by ignoring factors like inequalities, discrimination, family background and luck.

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 core mission ( “first object”) of the U.S. government, as mentioned in Federalist Paper No. 10, is the protection of property rights and the protection of different faculties that allow individuals to gain and manage property. It doesn’t surprise me because of the American capitalist ideology, but I believe that today the government should focus on addressing social issues and reducing inequality.

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…

Yes, it is surprising that Federalist Paper No. 10 favors a republican (representative) form of government over democracy. Madison’s thinks that in democracy the majority faction could force its ideology on minority groups, ignoring their rights and interests. Madison argues that a republican system, with elected representatives, can control better by ensuring that a broader range of interests is considered. This approach, according to Madison, is more cautious in a diverse society.

1. Two key concepts in this video are the means of production and labor. In your comment, explain how you understand the means of production and labor. Give an example of each.

Means of production = resources, tools, and the facilities needed to create goods or services.

Labor= the human effort applied to these means of production to create a final product.

For example, in a chocolate factory, the means of production are the raw materials like cocoa beans and different machines for roasting, grinding, tempering, and packaging. Labor refers to the chocolate factory workers running these machines and performing tasks like mixing ingredients, production supervision, and packaging the final product.

2. Another important concept in understanding social class is value. Based on the ideas presented in Video 5.1  what is value?  What give “value” to value, what makes something valuable? 

In the video, value is explained by the Labor Theory of Value; A product’s value is measured by how much labor it takes to produce under normal circumstances, the more labor time – more value.

For example, a handcrafted chocolate bonbon, that resource their chocolate from a family-owned organic cacao farm in Costa Rica, where everything from planting and picking the cacao pods to the chocolate production is handmade, has more value than a machine-made, mass sourced and mass-produced chocolate bonbons because more human labor went into producing the chocolate.

Labor is the foundation of value, and it includes more than just the materials or tools, but also the human work(=labor) applied to them, and that’s what makes them valuable.

3. How are labor and value related? What’s the relationship/connection between the two?

Labor and value have a very close and reliant relationship. According to the Labor Theory of Value, labor is the source of all value. The time spent by workers on a product defines its value. The more labor (in time and effort) required to make something, the more valuable it is. Going back to the chocolate bonbon example, if it takes 4 hours to make it, the value of that chocolate bonbon is going to be based on that labor time.

4. How do you understand the difference between labor and labor power? Hint: this is a key difference, give it your best shot based on what the video says about it, and your own ideas. We’ll clarify and develop it in our discussions, and in my video comments.

The way I understand the difference between Labor and Labor Power is that Labor is the actual work done by a person to produce goods or services and Labor Power refers to a worker’s ability or capacity to work.

When a person goes to work, she or he are selling their labor power to their employer for some time (i.e. “work hours”). The employer then uses the worker’s labor within that time frame to create products, goods or services.

The main difference is that Labor is the action, while Labor Power is the ability to work or the potential to work, which can be rented out to employers in exchange for salaries. For example, based on their experience a chocolatier chef can rent their labor power to a high-end chocolate boutique owner. Their actual work in the shop is their labor.

5. Surplus Value: what is it? Why is it important to know about, in our study of social classes? Think about an example of surplus value?

According to the Marxist theory, surplus value refers to the additional value produced by workers’ labor that exceeds the wages they receive for their work, beyond what is necessary to sustain themselves. If it takes 4 hours of labor to earn enough to cover a worker’s wages and living expenses, but the worker continues to work for 8 hours, the additional 4 hours of labor produces surplus value, which is basically considered as a profit for the employees.

This surplus value is important because it’s where profits come from in a capitalist system. The business owner (capitalist) keeps this surplus value as profit. That’s how capitalism works: the capitalist hires other people to increase the value of what they have, and then they keep that extra value (i.e. Surplus Value) for themselves. That is why Marx argued that capitalism exploits workers. Surplus value shows the inequity in how profits are made and shared in a capitalist society.

In the chocolate shop mentioned above, surplus value is created when the chocolatier chef is paid $25 an hour but produces chocolate bonbons that make $100 in sales per hour. The $75 difference is the surplus value, an additional value created by the chocolatier’s labor that makes the owner’s profit.