1. Ruth Gilmore suggests that “whiteness” and racism are closely tied because racial capitalism is built on systems that benefit white people at the expense of others. “Whiteness” isn’t just about skin color but rather it’s a social and economic position that gives certain groups privilege and power. Racism is used to maintain this imbalance by treating certain people as inferior or less valuable.
2. According to Gilmore, the prison system creates criminals by labeling people as “criminal” and trapping them in cycles of poverty, surveillance, and incarceration. Once someone is imprisoned, they face stigma, difficulty finding jobs, and fewer opportunities for success. This often forces them into situations where they might break the law again. I agree with her to some extent because the system often punishes people instead of helping them change their lives, making it harder for them to escape that label.
3. By “liberation struggle,” Gilmore refers to the fight to free people from systems of oppression, such as racism, economic injustice, and mass incarceration. She emphasizes that liberation is not just about ending prisons but also about creating fairer systems where everyone has access to education, jobs, healthcare, and opportunities to thrive. For Gilmore, true liberation means building a society where everyone is valued equally, and people aren’t judged or punished unfairly based on their race or class.

The Wal-Mart case was brought by women who claimed they were being discriminated against in pay and promotions. The U.S. Supreme Court decided against a class-action lawsuit because of the concept of “commonality.” Commonality in legal terms means that all the people involved in a class-action lawsuit must share similar issues or experiences. For the case to move forward as a class-action, the Supreme Court said that the women suing Wal-Mart needed to prove that they had common claims that applied to everyone in the class. The Court argued that the women didn’t show enough evidence of a company-wide policy that was unfair to all female employees. Since the women couldn’t prove that Wal-Mart’s actions were consistently the same across the entire company, they couldn’t form a valid class to sue together.

1. The court system is better at protecting individuals because it is independent and neutral. Courts are not swayed by public opinion or election pressure. Judges can focus on the law and the Constitution, rather than trying to please voters or special interest groups. In contrast, elected officials like Congress members, the President, or mayors are influenced by what will help them get re-elected. This can lead to decisions that favor the majority, sometimes at the expense of individual rights.
2. The idea that the Supreme Court is “anti-democratic” comes from the fact that justices are not elected by the people. Instead, they are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. This means the public doesn’t directly choose them, unlike the President or members of Congress. The framers of the Constitution designed the system this way because they were worried that special interest groups would influence the government. They wanted a court that could make decisions based on the Constitution, not public opinion or election pressures. This was to protect minority rights, even if the majority disagreed. Judges are appointed for life to remain impartial. This allows them to make fair decisions, without worrying about re-election. While this may seem undemocratic, it was meant to avoid political pressures and protect individual rights.

1. P. Williams discusses how the war on terror is different from traditional war because it doesn’t involve two countries fighting each other directly. Instead, it’s often against non-state groups or terrorists in conflict with one another. Traditional wars usually have clear sides; for example an army of a specific country. In contrast, war on terror involves fighting groups that may be spread out around the world. Traditional wars also focus more on preventing attacks rather than just winning battles.
2. The “Roving Wiretaps” from the Patriot Act can seem to violate the Bill of Rights. It is particularly in violation of the Fourth Amendment which protects against unreasonable searches and seizures. This amendment says that the government needs a warrant based on probable cause to wiretap someone’s phone. Roving wiretaps allow law enforcement to track multiple phones without getting a new warrant each time. Some people believe takes away personal privacy rights.
3. “Sneak and Peek” warrants allow law enforcement to search a person’s property without notifying them right away. This can seem to violate the Fourth Amendment because it allows searches without immediate notice. Some argue that this is an abuse of power and invasion of privacy. People should be informed about searches in a timely manner, but these warrants let the government delay that notification until after the fact.

1. The Establishment Clause is a part of the First Amendment that states that the government can’t establish an official religion or favor one religion over another. The Lemon Test is a way for courts to decide if a law violates this clause.
2. Burning the US flag is protected by the First Amendment. This was established in the Supreme Court case Texas v. Johnson. The Court ruled that flag burning is a form of free speech, despite many people finding it disrespectful. The idea is that the First Amendment protects all types of free speech no matter who it offends.
3. When someone says “I’m taking the Fifth,” they mean they are refusing to answer questions that might incriminate them. It’s a way to protect their rights and avoid self-incrimination under the 5th amendment.

1. In federal systems, citizens have a role in both national and state governments. They can vote for representatives at both levels, which allows them to influence decisions locally and nationally. For example, citizens can vote for lower-class representatives such as councilmen but also participate in national elections such as the presidency. In confederation systems, the central government has limited power. The states retain most of the authority and the national government often has little direct influence on citizen’s daily lives. In unitary systems, the central government holds most of the power. Citizens mainly interact with local governments, which are often created and controlled by the central government. Local representatives have less independence, and the national government decides many key policies for the state. 
2. The division of power means that government authority is shared among different levels. In the United States, this includes division between the three branches; executive, legislative, and judicial. Power is also divided between the national government and the states. Each level has its separate responsibilities. This setup allows for a balance of power, where both levels can work independently but also cooperate when necessary.
3. The federal government shapes local and state governments by providing funding and guidelines allocated to designated areas of concern. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the federal government influenced the actions of New York State and local governments in several ways. Some examples include social distancing, mask mandates, vaccine mandates, and quarantine guidelines. Because COVID-19 was seen as a national threat, the federal government had the authority to do what it saw fit to contain the threat. Federal funding also played a significant role. The government allocated funds to states that provided financial support to help states manage the pandemic’s impact.

1. Factions seem similar to social classes/groups. Just like factions, social classes/groups are formed around shared interests or beliefs and social/wealth status. This can sometimes lead to conflict or competition with other groups.
2. In Federalist #10, James Madison says that wealth comes from private property. The differences in wealth are due to people’s “faculties” which just means their natural talents/abilities. Some people can use their skills to gain wealth, while others may not have the same opportunities or abilities, leading to different social classes.
3. People’s abilities and opportunities do influence wealth, but there are also many other factors, like luck and systemic issues, that affect poverty.
4. The core mission of the US government is to protect property rights and maintain order. Today, society suggests that the government should focus more on social welfare and equality. In contrast, the founders emphasized protecting individual rights and property as fundamental.
5. I’m not surprised that Federalist #10 favors a Republican form of government over democracy because many people in power at that time worried that democracy could lead to mob rule, where majority factions might oppress minority groups. He thought a representative government would better balance the interests of different social classes and prevent tyranny by the majority.

1. Each of the readings argue that the small wealthy elite founded our constitution. They represented the best interest for businessmen. Some of these people included landowners, merchants, and financers who sought to form a government that would protect their economic interests. The lower class such as laborers/indentured servants were exempt from participating in the creation of the constitution and had little to no influence in the formation of government. In reading 6.2, Beard highlights that the Constitution was a product of the economic interests of the delegates, who aimed to secure their property and wealth. He also points out that the framers were worried about debts and economic instability that could arise from having a democracy which might favor the lower classes.
2. The social class structure in early U.S. society was quite different from what we see today. In the late 1700s, there was a much clearer separation between the wealthy elite and the lower classes. The middle class was practically non existent. The rich had much more political power and influence, while the general population had fewer rights and less representation. Although economic inequalities still exist, the political system allows more people from different social classes to participate.
3. The elite who wrote the Constitution were worried about direct democracy because they thought it could lead to chaos or threaten property rights. They were concerned that uneducated voters might make choices that could hurt the wealth and stability of the rich. This fear came from their own social status, as they wanted to protect their interests from the potential changes that a more equal society might bring. Parenti points out that the framers set up a system with checks and balances to limit the influence of the general public in order to keep control over the government and safeguard their economic interests.

1. The statistic that caught my eye the most was about how those with less wealth struggle to have access to quality education, healthcare, and housing. This then creates a cycle of poverty. Wealthy individuals comparatively have a disproportionate influence on shaping laws and policies that favor their interests rather than the common good. .
2. Significant wealth gaps cause division among different social classes leads to instability within communities. Public schools in wealthier areas often receive more funding. This results in better facilities and resources compared to schools in poorer neighborhoods and affects children’s opportunities for success. Additionally, people with lower incomes may struggle to afford healthcare. Wealthier individuals can access the best medical services, leading to disparities in health outcomes.