After watching the video, I realized that two key concepts that stand out to me are the means of
production and labor. The means of production refer to the physical and non-physical resources
used to produce goods and services, such as factories, land, and machinery. For example, a
clothing factory and the sewing machines inside it would be considered part of the means of
production. On the other hand, labor is the work individuals do to create goods or
services. In the case of the clothing factory, labor would be the work done by the workers who
sew garments together.

The video also touches on the idea of value, which refers to the worth of a product or service.
Value is often determined by the amount of labor that goes into producing something and its social importance. For instance, the value of a handcrafted piece of furniture comes
from the materials used and the skilled labor and time required to make it. What
gives value to something is primarily based on the labor invested in it and society’s perception of
its usefulness or desirability.
Labor and value are deeply connected because labor is what creates value. Without labor, the
means of production alone would not result in anything valuable. The relationship between labor
and labor power is also essential to understand. Labor refers to the actual work done, while labor
power is the worker’s capacity to perform labor, which they sell in exchange for
wages.
Surplus value is the extra value laborers produce over and above what they are paid in
wages. This is important in studying social classes because it explains how capitalists
accumulate wealth—by extracting surplus value from the workers’ labor. For example, if a

worker is paid $10 for an hour of labor but produces $20 worth of goods in that time, the $10
the difference is the surplus value that the capitalist gains. This surplus is central to understanding
the exploitation of labor in capitalist societies.

1. Reading 4.3 clearly distinguishes between two primary social classes: owners and
   employees. Owners possess the wealth and assets of society, living off
   investments such as stocks, rents, and other forms of property income. On the other hand,
   employees must work to earn a living, receiving wages, salaries, or fees for
   their labor.
   For example, Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon, is a member of the owning class, as he profits
   largely from investments and the labor of his employees, who generate wealth for his company.
   Conversely, a factory worker at Amazon is part of the employee class, working for wages but
   creating much more value than what they earn.
   This distinction is interesting because some small business owners might technically fall under the “owners” category but often don’t enjoy the same security or
   influence as more prominent corporate owners. As the reading mentions, these small proprietors are more vulnerable to being outcompeted or even pushed out of the market by large corporations..
   This distinction between owners and employees and labor exploitation (e.g.,
   workers being paid significantly less than the value they create) is a foundational concept of
   capitalism. Owners profit by paying workers a fraction of what their labor produces, amassing
   great wealth through this process. Despite the different income levels

   among employees, the
   key factor remains that those who control capital benefit from the labor of others.
2. The quote by Adam Smith on page 28, “Labor… is alone the ultimate and real standard by
   which the value of all commodities can at all times and places be estimated and compared,”
   emphasizes that labor is the true source of value in any product or commodity. Smith argues
   that the effort, time, and skills workers put into producing goods and services give those
   items their value, not just the money that is exchanged for them.
   In essence, without the input of human labor, commodities wouldn’t exist in a usable or
   profitable form. For example, a tree in a forest doesn’t have much value on its own. Still, through
   the labor of cutting it down, processing it into lumber, and eventually turning it into furniture,
   value is added. This idea asserts that human work is at the core of economic production and
   value creation, making labor a fundamental factor in any economic system.

Smith’s argument suggests that while the market price (monetary value) might fluctuate based on
supply, demand, and other factors, the real value of a commodity is directly tied to the labor that
went into creating it. This underscores the critical role of workers in generating wealth, even
though the profits often go to the owners of capital rather than the laborers themselves.

3. The reading presents a critique of the concept of class as identity, suggesting that while class
   can be an aspect of one’s identity, it should not be conflated with other identity categories like
   race or gender.
   One of the core arguments is that class operates differently within the social structure compared
   to race or gender. For instance, while race and gender are individual attributes that affect
   personal identity and social interactions, class is a relational and structural concept. It is defined
   by one’s position within the capitalist system and the economic relations that come with it. This
   distinction is critical because it highlights how class is embedded in and influenced by systemic
   power dynamics rather than just personal experience.
   The reading also critiques the liberal notion that class can be simply ranked or categorized like
   socioeconomic status. This perspective can reduce class to just another form of identity politics,
   focusing on individual status rather than systemic exploitation and power. The socialist
   perspective, however, argues that class encompasses a broader systemic structure—capitalists
   and workers have fundamentally different interests and power dynamics. This structural
   relationship shapes societal functions and the distribution of resources, influencing various forms
   of social inequality.
   Furthermore, the reading suggests that addressing other forms of oppression, like racial or gender
   inequality, requires acknowledging and challenging the capitalist system that underpins these
   inequalities. The capitalist structure creates and maintains power imbalances, which affect how
   different forms of identity interact and are experienced in society.
   In summary, the reading emphasizes that while class can influence individual identity, it operates
   within a different framework than other identity categories. Understanding class as a
   structural and systemic issue helps clarify why addressing class power is essential for achieving
   broader social justice and addressing various forms of inequality.
4. Reading 4.4 argues that class structures are built around a “close form of dependency,” which
   refers to the interdependence between different social classes within the capitalist system. This
   dependency is not merely economic but also structural, where the existence and functioning of
   one class are intimately connected to and dependent on the other.
   The “close form of dependency” means that the economic well-being of the working class relies
   on the wealth and profits generated by the capitalist class. For instance, workers depend on
   capitalists for employment and wages, while capitalists depend on workers to produce goods and
   services that drive their profits. This mutual reliance creates a structured relationship where each
   class’s position and power are defined by the other.
   An example of this dependency can be seen in the manufacturing sector. Workers in factories
   depend on capitalists for their jobs, while capitalists rely on workers to operate machinery and
   produce products that are sold for profit. This relationship underscores the economic and social

interdependence between the two classes, highlighting how their roles and statuses are closely
linked within the capitalist system.

1. The two readings discuss social class from different perspectives but share similarities in
   their exploration of how the class is differentiated.

Similarities:
Focus on Socioeconomic Factors: Both readings highlight income as a significant determinant of
social class. Reading 4.1 emphasizes income, wealth, education, and occupation as critical variables
for defining social class. Similarly, Reading 4.2 shows the extreme income inequality in New
York City, illustrating how income shifts between neighborhoods.
Hierarchical Structure: Both readings acknowledge the existence of a class hierarchy. Reading
4.1 discusses how Americans self-identify across various classes (lower, working, middle, and
upper) while Reading 4.2 highlights income gaps that naturally create societal hierarchies.

Differences:
Subjective vs. Objective Approach: Reading 4.1 primarily discusses social class regarding
subjective self-identification—how people perceive and categorize themselves. In contrast,
Reading 4.2 takes a more objective approach by using statistical data (such as median household
income along subway stations) to describe income inequality.
Geographical Context: Reading 4.2 focuses specifically on New York City and how income
inequality varies across its boroughs and neighborhoods, using subway lines as a reference. Conversely, Reading 4.1 looks at the broader national perspective of social class identification
in the U.S. without focusing on specific locations.
In essence, both readings reflect how social class is shaped by income, but they diverge in their
methods—subjective perception in Reading 4.1 versus concrete data in Reading 4.2.

2. Living near Crown Heights station in Brooklyn, I’ve observed a diverse range of people,
   which mirrors the social class complexity discussed in Reading 4.1. Based on subjective and objective social class concepts, I would say that Crown Heights likely
   includes a mix of working-class, lower-middle-class, and some middle-class residents.
   While I’m not surprised by this, especially given the gentrification happening in parts of the
   neighborhood, I do feel that this accurately represents the area. Long-time residents,
   many of whom are working-class, coexist with newer, middle-class individuals moving in due to
   increasing rents and housing development. This reflects the fluidity of social class in urban areas,
   where socioeconomic status can vary widely, even within a few blocks.

It’s fascinating to see how subjective class self-identification can differ based on factors like
income, education, and even perceptions of social standing. My neighborhood showcases that
diversity well.

3. Based on Reading 4.2, a clear pattern of stark income inequality emerges across New
   York City, particularly as highlighted through the data on subway stations. The disparity
   between the wealthiest areas, like those around Chambers Street in Lower Manhattan,
   and the poorest, such as Sutter Avenue in Brooklyn, is striking. This massive income gap
   shows how social classes in NYC are often determined by geographic location and are
   influenced by neighborhood development, access to resources, and the
   proximity to economic hubs.
   What stands out is that the distribution of social classes in NYC is not random; it follows a
   pattern of wealth segregation. Wealthier residents live near financial
   centers and elite institutions, while lower-income residents are pushed further into outer
   boroughs or less developed neighborhoods. The city’s infrastructure, such as the subway
   system, reflects this pattern as it connects vastly different economic worlds within a short
   distance. This confirms that New York City is a place where the lines between social classes
   are visible and heavily influenced by location and income, creating a city of extreme.

1. Understanding Repressive State Apparatus (RSA)
   A Repressive State Apparatus (RSA) refers to the institutions and structures within a state that
   enforce compliance through the use of force, coercion, or the threat of punishment. Althusser
   calls it “repressive” because these apparatuses maintain order and control by directly or
   indirectly applying physical force to ensure that individuals follow the rules and norms
   established by the ruling class. Examples of RSAs include the police, military, judicial system,
   and prisons. These institutions exert power through enforcement, ensuring that dissent is
   suppressed and laws are upheld.
   For instance, the police force is an RSA that maintains law and order by enforcing laws and
   arresting those who violate them. When protests arise, the use of police to disperse crowds or
   arrest participants exemplifies the repressive function of the state, as it directly controls behavior
   through the threat or application of force.
2. Ideological State Apparatuses (ISA)
   On the other hand, ideological State Apparatuses (ISAs) are institutions that exert control
   through ideology rather than physical force. They shape individuals’ beliefs, values,
   and perceptions, making them conform to the dominant ideology more subtly and often unconsciously. ISAs include institutions like schools, churches, media, and family structures.
   These entities propagate ideologies that align with the ruling class’s interests, ensuring that
   individuals internalize these beliefs and act accordingly.
   For example, the education system as an ISA instills in students the values of hard work,
   discipline, and obedience, which are aligned with the needs of the capitalist system. Students learn to accept the status quo and their place within it through curricula and the hidden curriculum, often without questioning the underlying power structures.
3. Differences Between RSAs and ISAs
   The key difference between Repressive State Apparatuses (RSAs) and Ideological State
   Apparatuses (ISAs) lies in the methods they use to maintain control. RSAs enforce conformity
   through direct coercion or the threat of force, making their actions visible and often immediate.
   ISAs, however, operate more subtly by influencing the way people think and behave through the
   dissemination of ideology. While RSAs use physical force to maintain order, ISAs rely on
   persuasion and the internalization of dominant ideologies to achieve the same goal.
   In essence, RSAs maintain control through fear and force, while ISAs do so through consent
   and belief. Both apparatuses are essential for the reproduction of the existing social order, but
   they operate in fundamentally different ways.
4. Example of Ideologyhttps://www.georgeeliotacademy.org.uk/news/?pid=21&nid=1&storyid=26 Feminism for all! This is an article written by George Eliot Media Club pupils.“Feminism, by definition, is the idea that all genders should be treated equally. For example, equal pay; equally priced access to hygiene products (such as razors, sanitary products, etc); freedom to be able to wear what we want, and freedom from harmful stereo types and the ability to feel safe in public areas. Unfortunately, some of these human rights have not been achieved across the globe we need feminism to change this.There are many misconceptions with feminism including the idea that feminism is actually a bad thing synonymous with hating men, and that to be a feminist, is to put women’s rights before men’s. Most people seem to think that feminism is something only needed in the past when there was a greater divide in gender roles. Now a days there is still a divide between all genders despite us coming a long way. Also, women’s rights in western societies have progressed further than women’s rights in some countries of the world. We need feminism until women’s rights are equal to men’s rights across the globe.

1. Understanding Ideology in My Own Words
   Ideology is a collection of beliefs, values, and ideas that guide how individuals and
   groups view the world and make decisions. It shapes our understanding of right or
   wrong, influencing how we perceive society and our role. Ideology acts like a blueprint,
   providing a structured way of interpreting complex social and political issues.
   For instance, the ideology of environmentalism is grounded in the belief that protecting the
   environment is crucial for the survival and well-being of future generations. This ideology drives
   policies and actions prioritizing sustainability, conservation, and reducing human
   impact on the planet.
   Expanding on this, ideology functions as a powerful force that not only shapes individual beliefs
   but also governs societal norms and values. It can unify groups with shared perspectives while
   simultaneously creating divisions with those who hold opposing views. Ideologies can be deeply
   rooted, making them resistant to change, even in the face of new evidence. Understanding
   ideology is critical to analyzing how societies operate and how power is distributed and maintained.
2. Conservative vs. Liberal Ideology in US Politics
   In US politics, conservative and liberal ideologies represent two distinct
   governance and societal organization approaches. Conservatives emphasize the
   importance of tradition, individual responsibility, and limited government intervention. They
   advocate for policies that promote free enterprise, personal liberty, and a robust national
   defense. On the other hand, liberals focus on the principles of equality, social justice, and the
   role of government in addressing systemic inequalities. They support policies that
   expand social safety nets, protect civil rights, and regulate the economy to ensure fairness.
   The significant difference between these ideologies often lies in their approach to the role of
   government. Conservatives typically argue for a smaller government that allows individuals and
   businesses to operate with minimal regulation. They believe that this leads to greater efficiency
   and innovation. Liberals, however, view government as an essential tool for promoting the
   common good, arguing that it is responsible for protecting vulnerable populations and ensuring
   equal opportunities for all.
   An example that highlights this ideological divide is the debate over taxation. Conservatives
   often advocate for lower taxes, particularly on businesses and the wealthy, arguing that this
   stimulates economic growth and job creation. Liberals, in contrast, support progressive taxation,
   where the wealthy pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes as a means of redistributing
   wealth and funding social programs that benefit society as a whole.
3. Understanding Althusser’s Definition of Ideology
   Althusser defines ideology as the unconscious system of beliefs and values that shape our
   perceptions and behaviors, mainly through the influence of social institutions such as schools, churches, and the media. He suggests that ideology operates by “interpellating” individuals, meaning it calls upon them to assume specific roles and identities that align with the dominant social order. In simpler terms, Althusser views ideology as an invisible force we often don’t recognize, yet it profoundly influences how we think and act. For example, the ideology of patriotism can lead individuals to support policies or actions that align with national interests, even when they may not personally benefit from them. This happens because the ideology has already shaped their identity as citizens, prioritizing their country’s welfare above all else. Althusser’s perspective on ideology challenges us to recognize the subtle ways in which our thoughts and actions are shaped by external forces, often without our conscious awareness. It encourages us to critically examine the ideologies we take for granted and consider how they might serve the interests of particular groups while marginalizing others.