Crime has often been used as a form of social control by defining certain people and behaviors as dangerous this is especially the case around poor and marginalized communities. Laws and policing practices tend to focus more heavily on these groups. This makes them more likely to be arrested and punished even when crime rates are similar across different social classes. This creates a cycle where some communities are constantly under surveillance while others are largely protected from the same level of scrutiny. Over time crime slowly becomes a way to justify inequality since the people labeled as criminals are unfortunitly treated as less deserving of rights and opportunities.

Michelle Alexander argues that mass incarceration functions as a modern form of segregation. Instead of openly racist laws the system now uses the label “criminal” to exclude people especially Black Americans from full participation in society. After incarceration, individuals often face barriers to jobs, housing, and voting, which keeps them in a second-class status. Alexander shows that this system is legal and normalized which makes it harder to see as discriminatory. Together these ideas explain how crime and punishment help maintain social and racial hierarchies in the U.S.

Israt Kaniz Nipa

1.Repressive State Apparatuses (RSAs) are the parts of the state that keep control mainly through power, punishment, or the threat of force. According to philosopher Louis Althusser these include the police, military, prisons, and courts. Their main goal is to make people obey laws through discipline or fear. For example, if a group of workers protests for better pay, the police might be sent to stop them or arrest the leaders. That shows the state using physical power to protect the system and maintain order. RSAs don’t try to convince people they use control to make them comply.

2.Ideological State Apparatuses (ISAs) are institutions that shape how people think act and understand the world but they do it in ways that seem normal or harmless. Examples include schools, families, religions, and the media. These systems teach social values like respect for authority, patriotism, and competition. For instance, schools don’t just teach reading and math; they also teach discipline, obedience, and punctuality skills that prepare people to follow rules and fit into the working system. Ideology works best when people don’t realize they are being shaped by it.

3.The difference between Repressive and Ideological State Apparatuses is in how they control people. RSAs use direct force or punishment, while ISAs use beliefs, education, and culture to influence people’s minds. Someone who follows the law because they fear jail is being controlled by repression. Someone who follows the law because they believe it’s morally right is being guided by ideology. Both help the government maintain control, but one works through fear while the other works through belief.

4.A modern example of both apparatuses can be seen in advertising. For instance a U.SnArmy recruitment commercial that says “Be All You Can Be” uses ideology by connecting military service to personal growth, pride, and honor. It encourages people to see joining the army as a positive life choice. But the same ad is tied to a repressive structure because the army itself is part of the state’s power system that uses force to protect national interests. The ad promotes obedience and loyalty in a way that feels inspiring rather than controlling showing how ideology and repression can work together in society.

Israt Kaniz Nipa

1. The Idea of Social Class in Both Readings
   Both readings show how social class is more than just how much money someone earns it’s also about where people live, what kind of work they do, and how they see themselves in society. The readings explain that even though many people in America consider themselves middle class there are clear differences in lifestyle and opportunity. The subway in New York is a good example of this it connects everyone, but you can still see class divisions from neighborhood to neighborhood.
2. My Subway Station and Class Observation
   The station closest to me is Church Avenue, which I’d describe as a working class area. It’s busy and full of people from different backgrounds students, retail workers, delivery drivers, and families. It’s not a wealthy neighborhood, but it has a strong sense of community. The area feels like a mix of working and lower middle class people, and you can tell by the small businesses, local shops, and the diversity of people taking the train every day.
3. Social Inequality and Perception in NYC
   New York City shows a huge gap between the rich and poor. You can see it just by taking the subway some stations are cleaner and safer, while others feel neglected. People often believe they are middle class, even if they struggle financially, because everyone wants to feel stable. But the truth is, wealth and comfort aren’t evenly distributed. The subway makes those differences visible, showing how social class and inequality exist side by side in the same city.

1. If I was to guess some similarities between these social classes I would say, there are some interesting connections beyond just income. They both highlight the presence of different social classes. Come to a realization that not everyone has the same amount of money or opportunities. The subway does the same thing, you’re going to see people from all different backgrounds riding together. Discussions about social class are often shaped by the environment and context in which people live and interact. In the subway weather it’s clean or crowded it definitely can change the way you perspective the inequalities. Another example would be the perceptions of fairness in opportunities and outcomes. On subway stations just because some areas are good looking doesn’t mean the rest could be a bit more lower class which in yet there is a point but services should be treated all the same. So in reality, it’s not just about how much money people have, but also about how these differences are made visible, how the environment shapes perceptions, and how people view the fairness of the system.

Now some differences I could come up with are how they usually are about income, wealth, education, and opportunities in society. On the train, it is a public service. It’s more about transportation, accessibility, and how well the city is serving its residents. Social class discussion covers the entire country and affects many aspects of life, like jobs and healthcares. The subway mainly impacts people who live in or come for a visit and primarily affects their ability to get around. Social class people may feel a sense of agency to advocate for policy changes or support organizations working to address inequality. On the subway, individuals have more direct ways to voice their concerns through local elections or community meetings. While both touch on inequality, social class discussions are broader and deal with the whole system, while the subway is a specific example of how inequality plays out in a city service 

2. I strongly believe on my end, 103rd St “Corona Plaza” station in Queens is pretty diverse, but it’s generally considered a working-class and lower middle class neighborhood. You’ll find a lot of immigrant families, small business owners all around “Roosevelt” , and people working in service industries. While there’s definitely a range of incomes, It’s not typically an area where you’d find a lot of upper middle class or wealthy residents.   

3. I would say yes, there are definitely some patterns all around. The subway hits lower income areas harder with problems, there’s a perception of unequal service favoring wealthier areas, and improvements linked to gentrification can displace residents. The subway reflects and reinforces social class divisions in NYC.

Crime has often been used as a form of social control by people in power. The way laws are made and enforced can target certain groups while protecting others which keeps the social order tilted in favor of those already in charge even just the fear of being labeled a criminal can make people change their behavior to fit what society expects in that way crime isn’t only about breaking rules it’s also about controlling people and keeping power structures in place.

1. The first article is about how people perceive their own social class and looks at the variables that might affect a person’s self identification. The main indicator was income with other factors such as education and race also making an impact, though less notable. An interesting thing to note is that Americans are less likely to identify with extremes on either end of the spectrum, preferring to identify with the working, middle, or even upper middle class.
2. I live closest to Pelham Parkway on the 2 line. My neighborhood is a majority working class neighborhood. When I looked into the wealth distribution along the 2 line, an article noted that this train line had the greatest wealth gap among all train lines. With this being said, it was not a surprise to me what social class tends to live in my neighborhood since working and going to school in neighborhoods all along this train line makes the class distinction very obvious. I think it is an accurate representation of the people living in my neighborhood.
3. After looking into other sources mapping out the wealth inequality on train lines it seems that the highest concentration of wealth is in Lower Manhattan and the further away you get the lower that concentration of wealth gets, with the exception of some suburbs along the furthest stops on the train lines. The outer boroughs tend to be home to much lower income people. It is something we can see in real life, where the demographic of commuters shift rapidly at pivotal train stops. The difference is marked in class and also race.

Do you notice any similarities in how social class is discussed in readings 4.1 and 4.2? Both readings see social class as tied to money, education, and lifestyle. Reading 4.1 says people pick classes like middle or working based on income and schooling. Reading 4.2 shows NYC subway riders’ class through jobs, clothes, and neighborhoods. Both agree class is more than just money it’s how people act and see themselves. They also say few pick extreme labels like “upper” or “lower.”

Do you notice any differences in how these two readings differentiate between social classes? Reading 4.1 uses set labels: upper, upper-middle, middle, working, lower. It links them to income and education data. Reading 4.2 shows class through subway life like bankers in suits versus workers in uniforms. It focuses on visible signs, not strict categories. Reading 4.1 is about numbers; Reading 4.2 tells a story.

Pick the station closest to where you live. Using concepts from Reading 4.1, what social class tends to live in your neighborhood? Are you surprised (or not) by the answer? Do you feel it is an accurate representation of the people living in your neighborhood?

The closest station to me is Parkchester in the Bronx. Reading 4.1 says class comes from income and education. Parkchester’s median income is about $50,000-$60,000, below NYC’s average. Most residents have high school or some college, pointing to working or middle class. I’m not surprised it’s a mix of immigrants, teachers, and service workers. It seems right but might miss richer or poorer folks in nearby buildings

Based on Reading 4.2, do you notice a general pattern about social classes in NYC? Reading 4.2 shows NYC’s classes split by jobs, style, and subway stops. Wealthy riders like bankers ride in Manhattan, dressed sharp. Working-class folks like cleaners ride from outer boroughs like the Bronx, in practical clothes. Middle-class people mix at busy stops like Union Square. Class shows in where you ride and what you wear.

1. For question one, I can’t really compare Reading 4.1 and 4.2 because I found that Reading 4.2 wasn’t working. So, I only read Reading 4.1. From that, I understood that social class is explained through things like income, education, and the kind of job people have. It also shows how class shapes where people live and what opportunities they get.
2. The train station closest to me is the A line, and sometimes I also use the E line. Based on Reading 4.1, the area is mostly working class and middle class. I think that is true because I often see people going to work, families, and students on these trains. At the same time, it feels mixed because people from different backgrounds and classes ride together.
3. From Reading 4.1, I noticed that social classes in NYC are not equal. Some groups have higher income and more choices, while others have fewer resources. The subway shows this pattern clearly because rich and poor people both use it, but their living situations are very different once they leave the train.

1. Based on the readings there were subjective approaches where people placed themselves into socioeconomic categories. I have noticed how people placed themselves based on a certain class which required comparison to income, education and location where they are from. Those who have had a college degree considered themselves in the middle class, based on what their requirements they have reached. Someone like myself is also subjective to the class brackets where are identified by, though I am currently working on my degree, having been in my career field over 15 years I would of previously considered being middle class. When reviewing all the details and the chart status and taking into count the cost of living in New York, I changed my aspect to just working.

2. The subway station close to be are the D and 4 being they are only 2 blocks apart. The social class considered for my neighborhood is median. (I received this data from a google search being the site was down) The statis could be accurate as the neighborhood has been gentrified the last couple of years. Rent prices are gone up and the local supermarkets that catered to the area now has Manhattan city prices.

3. Unfortunately, i was unable to read 4.2 due to the site being down.

If i had to provide an idea of change in social classes in NYC, the wages does not aligned with the cost of living. Therefore, if you are a working class you are mostly considered lower class. If you are born in capitalist you will fall into the upper class dynamics.

1. I don’t really know the difference between Reading 4.1 and 4.2 because 4.2 doesn’t work. Reading 4.1 talks about social class by dividing it into lower, middle, and upper levels. It explains how class is connected to income, jobs, and education. It also shows that many people think of themselves as middle class even if their income is very different.
2. The train I will choose is the E line, which runs through Jamaica. Based on Reading 4.1, this area is mostly working class and middle class. I think this is true because the train is always filled with workers, families, and students. But I also think the reading does not show the full picture, since people from different classes ride the same line every day.
3. From Reading 4.1, I can see that social class in NYC is not evenly spread. Some neighborhoods have more wealth and resources, while others have less. On the subway you can see this contrast, since people from many income levels are sitting next to each other on the same train.