1. The wealthy, property owning class wrote the Constitution. Both readings say the men in Philadelphia were rich. Beard says many were creditors, merchants, big landowners, and slaveholders, like Robert Morris and Washington. Parenti calls them wealthy and powerful. The poor and working class was left out. Beard says enslaved people, indentured servants, men without enough property to vote, and women were not represented. The two classes were very different. The rich owned land, money, bonds, and slaves, and other people owed them money. The poor owned little and were in debt, paying 25 to 40 percent interest on loans. The rich could vote and hold office, but most poor people could not. Parenti says the debate between haves and have-nots never took place because the delegates only argued with other rich men.

2. I think it is different because the law is more equal now. Slavery is gone, women can vote, and you don’t need property to vote. There is also a bigger middle class. It is still similar because a small group of rich people has most of the wealth and a lot of the power. Many regular people are still in debt. So the rules changed, but the gap between rich and poor is still big.

3. Because they were rich, and democracy means the poor majority could rule. In 1787, most people were poor, and the rich were a small group. If the majority had power, they could pass laws against the rich, like canceling debts or printing paper money. Madison feared a rage for paper money, for an abolition of debts, for an equal division of property. Gerry even called democracy the worst of all political evils. So they made a government that is hard for the majority to control. They created the Senate (chosen by state legislatures), the Electoral College, and judges nobody votes for. They wanted to protect their property and their position in society.

1. It reminds me of social classes. Madison says a faction is a group united by a common interest that goes against the rights of other citizens. He says property creates different interests and parties like the rich and the poor, or creditors and debtors. Parenti calls the poor majority the majority faction.

2. Madison says wealth comes from the different faculties of people. Faculties means abilities, talents, and skills. In his view, some people have more ability to get property, so they become rich. Others have less ability, so they stay poor. He says property rights come from this difference. So he explains wealth and poverty by people’s own abilities, not by luck, birth, or unfair laws.

3. I only partly agree. Talent and hard work matter, but they are not the whole story. Many people are born into rich or poor families, and that gives them very different chances. In 1787, enslaved people and women could not own property no matter how talented they were. Madison himself was from a rich slaveholding family. So I think his explanation leaves out a lot.

4. Madison says the first object of government is to protect the different and unequal abilities of people to get property. In simple words, the main job of government is to protect people’s right to get and keep wealth. Yes, it surprised me. Today we usually say the government’s job is to protect freedom, keep people safe, and serve all the people. Madison puts property first, and that mostly helps the rich.

5. No, it makes sense now. A pure democracy means the people rule directly, and in 1787 most people were poor. Madison says a majority united by a common interest could hurt the rights of others, and he feared the poor majority would cancel debts or divide property. That would hurt the rich, who were the creditors and the property owners. In a republic, a few elected people make the decisions, and the country is large, so it is harder for the poor majority to unite. This protects the wealthy class from the poor majority.

1. The one that stuck out to me the most was the part where it says the top 400 richest Americans had their wealth grow by almost $700 billion in just 8 years, and that ended up being more money than the bottom 50 percent of the whole country combined that’s like 150 million people. That number is honestly hard to even picture. It’s crazy that a few hundred people can have more wealth than half the entire country put together. That really shows how unequal things actually are.

2.When wealth is this unequal, it means most people are working hard just to get by, while a small group at the top keeps growing richer without doing the actual labor. It makes basic things like healthcare, housing, and food harder to afford, even though the country clearly has enough money overall. I see this in my own job. I’m a PCT in a care facility, and the people doing the hands-on work, the ones actually keeping patients safe get paid way less than people higher up who don’t do that daily labor. It’s the same pattern the reading talks about the people doing the real work aren’t the ones benefiting the most from it.

Capitalists stay rich and keep getting richer because of how the M-C-M cycle works. Before capitalism, people like farmers would sell something to get money, then use that money to buy what they needed and sell. Money was just a step in between. Capitalists do it backwards. They start with money, use it to buy something, then sell it to get money back. But money is never supposed to be the same, it has to be more. That extra bit of money is the profit. So where does that extra money come from? Capitalists pay workers a wage, but that wage only covers enough to keep the worker to have food, rent, stuff like that. Let’s say that wage only really covers about 4 hours of the workday, but they work the full 8hours. Those extra hours, the worker is still making stuff and creating value, but they’re not getting paid for that part. The capitalist just keeps that as profits.And this is why the wealth never stops growing. Once the capitalist has that extra money,they put it right back buy more materials, hire more workers, make more products, sell for even more money. It just keeps repeating and growing every time.

1.I understand the means of production as the things you need to make something, like tools, machines, and buildings. An example is the oven and flour in a bakery. Labor is the work people do to make things. An example is a baker making the bread.

2. I think value is how much something is worth. Value comes from the human work needed to make something. A thing is valuable because people spent time and effort making it, and because other people need or want it. Also, how much anything value depends on how much labor it needed to make.

3.Labor creates value. The more work time it takes to make something, the more value it has. When workers make a product, their work goes into it and becomes its value.

4.Labor is the actual work I do during my shift. Labor power is my ability to work, which I sell to my employer for a wage. I’m paid for my ability to work, not for everything my work creates.

5.Surplus value is the extra value workers create beyond what they are paid in wages. The owner keeps it as profit. It matters for studying social class because it shows how classes are connected and unequal. Owners make profit from the work of workers, who only have their labor power to sell. This is the root of class conflict. An example is a baker is paid $100 a day but makes $300 worth of bread. The $200 difference, after other costs, is surplus value that the owner keeps.

1. Reading 4.3 says owners are people who make money mainly from what they own like property not from working. Employees are people who make money by actually working like getting paid a salary. Example of an owner: someone who owns a company and lives off the profits. Example of an employee: a nurse or PCT like me who gets paid for the hours I work.
2. I think Smith is saying that labor is what really gives things value, not money. Money is just a number we use to represent that value. So something like a chair or a piece of paper is only worth something because of the work people put into making it.
3. I think the argument makes sense. Class isn’t just about how we see ourself, like race or gender it’s about our actual position in the economy. Are you the one who owns the business and profits off others, or are you the one who has to work for someone else to survive. That decides a lot about your life, not just how you identify. I do think class can feel personal too, like being proud to say I’m working class, but I get why the author says it’s way more than just an identity.
4. This means workers and owners need each other directly. A worker needs a specific boss or company to get paid, and the boss needs workers to actually do the labor that makes them money. It’s a two way need, unlike race, where your race doesn’t depend on a specific other person. Example: In my job as a PCT, my job depends on the facility hiring me, but the facility also depends on PCTs like me to actually take care of patients. Neither side can really work without the other.

A. Ideology is a set of beliefs and ideas that shape how people sees the world like what they think is right from wrong. It affects how people view government, and other people in society.

B. Here is one example: Someone who believes, if you work hard, you’ll succeed and poor people are just lazy is expressing a ideology. That belief shapes how they view programs, taxes, and government help.

C. Ideology is a whole worldview which works like a guidelines that helps us make sense from chaos. It usually comes from media, religion, and culture, and it gives what we consider right. But sometimes ideology can make unfair systems seem normal, so people accept things without questioning them. For example, many people accept that all immigrant should leave, without even asking themself does it fair.

2. In the US conservatives believe government should stay small when it comes to business and money. They think people should work hard and take care of themselves without much help from the government. On the other hand liberals believe government should help people more, especially poor and working people. They support things like healthcare, unemployment support, and minimum wage laws. But when it comes to personal choices, like abortion or marriage, they believe people should have more freedom and the government should not control that. So the dividing line is liberals like more government in the economy, less government in personal life. conservatives like less government in the economy, more government in personal life.

3. Althusser is saying that most control in society doesn’t come from police or laws when it comes to ideology, it comes from everyday things like school, media, and politics quietly shaping how we think and act, so we go along with the system without even realizing it. For example many democracies, you get to vote and feel like you have a voice and responsibility in society. But often the choices are between parties that aren’t really that different from each other. So it feels like you have power and freedom to choose, but really you’re just choosing between status quo and status quo.This makes people feel involved without actually challenging the system, which is exactly the kind of quiet control Althusser was talking about.

1. An RSA is the part of government that makes people follow rules by using force or punishment. Althusser calls it repressive because it holds people back or punishes them when they step out of line, instead of just guiding their thinking. For example: police, courts, prisons, the military. Like if people are blocking a highway during a protest, the police come and force them to move them.

2.ISAs are institutions that shape how we think and act, but without using force. They work through ideas, values, and beliefs, making certain behaviors feel normal. Because of this, we follow along on our own without anyone forcing us. For example: Schools, family, media, social media, religion.

3.RSA uses force, punishment, and law. ISA uses ideas, beliefs, and values. RSA is only public government institutions. ISA is a mix of public and private. RSA steps in after someone breaks a rule. ISA shapes how we think before we ever break a rule. Actually, RSA controls through fear, ISA controls through shaping what feels normal.

4.Example of ideology :A movie or show that always shows police as heroes and criminals as pure bad guys with no context about poverty or unfair systems. Apparatus is an Ideological State Apparatus media. It shapes how people think about crime and justice by making us support harsh punishment without questioning why crime happens in the first place, making the system feel fair and normal even when it isn’t.