LiLiu

Professor Arto Artinian

POL100 (0502): Discussion Board 11.1

June 26, 2021

1. In what ways is the court system better suited to protect the individual, than are the elected branches of government (such as Congress and the President; or the Mayor of NYC and the NYC City Assembly)? Give an example to illustrate your argument.

The court system is better suited to protect the individual, than are the elected branches of government because the U.S. judicial system is a dual court system, which has three basic tiers consisting of trial courts, appellate courts, and supreme courts. That means everyone has more than one court system to protect his/her rights. According to Reading 11.1 “The Dual Court System,” the author explains how people are protected by different U.S. court systems. For example, the author writes, “Ernesto Miranda, arrested for kidnapping and rape, which are violations of state law, was easily convicted and sentenced to prison after a key piece of evidence—his own signed confession—was presented at trial in the Arizona court. On appeal first to the Arizona Supreme Court and then to the U.S. Supreme Court to exclude the confession on the grounds that its admission was a violation of his constitutional rights, Miranda won the case” (The Dual Court System, par. 10). The dual court system protects the voices of a few people like Miranda being heard in court, and has been favorably resolved. Therefore, the court system is more suitable to protect individuals than elected government departments. 

2. Think about how federal judges get to become judges – unlike Presidents, Mayors and members of Congress (and other legislatures), they are not elected, but rather appointed. Many Americans have thus called the federal courts system, and especially the Supreme Court, anti-democratic PLACES IN OUR GOVERNMENT. Do you agree that the Supreme Court, for example, is an anti-democratic part of our government? What could be the reason for this way of choosing judges in federal courts? (HINT: think about our discussion of “Federalist #10”, and which social class plays a leading role in our government system.)

I agree that the Supreme Court is an anti-democratic part of our government because federal judges are not elected by the people, but appointed by the president. After the president nominates a judge, he needs to be confirmed by a majority of the Senate, so the senator exerts a considerable influence on the choice of judges. Before nominating judges, the president needs to consult with senators who have political ties with himself. These senators can block the judges nominated by the president by expressing opposition. This puts the appointment of federal judges firmly in the hands of the ruling party. Therefore, the Supreme Court is an anti-democratic part of our government. Moreover, they chose this approach to make the appointment of judges in the American judicial system to be in the hands of a few political parties with a clear ideology, so as to facilitate the protection of their own interests. Therefore, this is also the reason why they chose this way to choose federal judges. 

LiLiu

Professor Arto Artinian

POL100 (0502): Discussion Board 12.1

June 27, 2021

These questions are based on the “Sex Class Action” article:

1. What did the Supreme Court decide in the Wal-Mart case? And more importantly, how did it justify its decision?

The Supreme Court decided in the Wal-Mart case that the Supreme Court ruled that Wal-Mart won the case. In this case, the plaintiff tried to represent 1.6 million women, including women who are currently working or who have worked in Wal-Mart stores. However, the majority of judges of the Supreme Court believe that a small group of women cannot represent a female class, and the plaintiff does not have enough “commonality” to constitute a class. Justice Antonin Scalia of the Supreme Court expressed that “commonality” should be a class that must not only have a common problem, but also a common solution and a solution that compensates all members equally. The women represented by the plaintiff Dukes were not rejected, insulted, and degraded by the same store and the same manager. Therefore, the class represented by Dukes does not meet the common requirements of Rule 23 of Civil Procedure, which is “questions of law or fact.”

Moreover, the court ruled that the class represented by Dukes did not meet the “b(2)” class in Article 23 of the Civil Procedure Rules on class actions. Because the women represented by the plaintiff Dukes At the same time they demand wage claims, which should be classified as “b(3)” class. Thus, the court ruled that the plaintiff belonged to the “b(3)” class because the court held that the amount of wages paid by women was too high and could only be classified as a “b(3)” claim. This misclassification prevents Dukes and the women she represents from seeking injunctions or declarative relief. This not only harmed the class status of women, but also put the plaintiff at a disadvantage. Therefore, the Supreme Court decided that Wal-Mart won in the case. 

LiLiu

Professor Arto Artinian

POL100 (0502): Discussion Board 9.2

June 16, 2021

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?

The new about the war on terror is that the war on terror is a war of the mind, which means the definition of the war on terrorism is too broad. Because a terrorist might be anyone around you, and it makes people become sensitive and afraid of any potential people or factors that might become terrorists. Also, this has led few people to question the unusual civil measures taken by the government. Because people are fearful of another terrorist attack, they indulge the government’s wanton infringement of the rights granted to citizens by the Constitution. The difference between the war against terrorism and the traditional war is that the traditional war has clear enemies, and the government army only needs to destroy them to win. However, the war against terrorism defines the enemy too broadly, and it makes everyone living in the United States a possible “terrorist.” This has caused people to fall into the long-term fear that there may be terrorists around them, and it also makes people confused about whether this extensive war on terrorism has been won. 

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” of the Patriot Act seems to violate the Fourth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. Because the “Roving Wiretaps” of the Patriot Act regulations specifically allow investigators to eavesdrop on suspicious spies and terrorists. However, the Fourth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution stipulates that investigators must apply for and obtain a search warrant before searching and detaining a suspect to confirm that the suspect has committed a crime. For example, according to Reading 9.1, the author explained the Fourth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. The author writes, “In either case, the amendment indicates that government officials are required to apply for and receive a search warrant prior to a search or seizure; this warrant is a legal document, signed by a judge, allowing police to search and/or seize persons or property” (Reading 9.1). Therefore, the “Roving Wiretaps” of the Patriot Act violate the Fourth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution. 

3. What about “Sneak and Peek” Warrants?

“Sneak and Peek” Warrants, which means the FBI can search a home or business without immediately notifying the target of the investigation. This violates the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Because the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution stipulates that the person has the right to refuse to answer law enforcement officers’ questions that may provide evidence of his/her crime. However, “Sneak and Peek” Warrants allow “delayed notice” of search warrants, allowing investigators to have complete discretionary power without supervision over the content, time and location of the search. That not only violates the privacy of the person under investigation, but also prevents the person under investigation from claiming and protecting his/her rights. Therefore, “Sneak and Peek” Warrants violate the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. 

LiLiu

Professor Arto Artinian

POL100 (0502): Discussion Board 9.1

June 16, 2021

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

The “Establishment Clause” and the related “Lemon Test” are to help explain religious freedom, which is part of the First Amendment. Religious freedom has two parts. First is to protect people from the religious beliefs imposed on them by the government, and second is to protect people from government restrictions on their own religious beliefs. The first part of religious freedom is the “Establishment Clause,” which is stipulated that the government prohibits the creation or promotion of the religion it supports. Because the separation of church and state helps reduce the social unrest caused by religious conflicts. Moreover, the “Establishment Clause” also prohibits the government from favoring any one religious belief, leaving the government in a neutral state among all religions. Also, the related “Lemon Test” is to explain whether laws or other government actions that may promote certain religious practices are allowed to be established. The “Lemon Test” has three criteria to make such laws or actions effective and to be found constitutional. First, the relationship between government and religion should be relatively simple, which means that the actions or laws allowed by the government should not make the government and religion have too much entanglement. Second, the government’s influence on religion should be neutral. Third, the actions or laws permitted by the government must have some legitimate reasons for non-religious purposes. Thus, the “Establishment Clause” and the related “Lemon Test” is a detailed explanation of religious freedom in the First Amendment. 

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

Burning the US flag is protected by the First Amendment. Because the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution stipulates that the U.S. Congress must not enact laws to restrict citizens’ freedom of speech. The burning of the national flag is a symbolic speech which represents the one’s views of the parties concerned, and the act of burning the national flag for the purpose of expression. According to Reading 9.1, the author showed the case of burning the U.S. flag. The author writes, “In 1984, as part of a protest near the Republican National Convention in Dallas, Texas, Johnson set fire to a U.S. flag that another protestor had torn from a flagpole. He was arrested, charged with “desecration of a venerated object” (among other offenses), and eventually convicted of that offense. However, in 1989, the Supreme Court decided in Texas v. Johnson that burning the flag was a form of symbolic speech protected by the First Amendment and found the law, as applied to flag desecration, to be unconstitutional” (Reading 9.1). Therefore, the act of burning the American flag to express political opinions is protected by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. 

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

When someone says “I’m taking the Fifth,” which means the person has the right to refuse to answer law enforcement officers’ questions that may provide evidence of his/her crime. In other words, people have the right to remain silent in order to avoid answering the questions that put them in trouble in court. According to Reading 9.2, the author explained the meaning of “I’m taking the Fifth.” The author writes, “Perhaps the most famous provision of the Fifth Amendment is its protection against self-incrimination, or the right to remain silent. This provision is so well known that we have a phrase for it: “taking the Fifth.” People have the right not to give evidence in court or to law enforcement officers that might constitute an admission of guilt or responsibility for a crime” (Reading 9.2). Therefore, the meaning of “I’m taking the Fifth “is that the person has the right to refuse or remain silent on issues raised by law enforcement officials. 

LiLiu

Professor Arto Artinian

POL100 (0502): Discussion Board 7.1

June 16, 2021

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

The Federation has established two levels of government, and assigned legislative, judicial and administrative powers to these two levels of government, so as to maintain a certain degree of independence at each level. Besides, these two levels of government are elected by the people. The power of the confederation system is scattered, and every state has sovereignty and powerful power. The central government’s ability to act depends on the consent of the local government, which is the main shortcoming of this government system. Because the power of each state affects the effective governance of the central government. The power of the unitary system is concentrated in the central government, making local governments dependent on the power of the central government. The unitary central government has important powers. Therefore, the main differences in the role of citizens in government among federation, confederation and unitary systems is that in the federal system, citizens vote for representatives. In the confederation system, citizens will have more power because local governments are elected by them. In the unitary system, the power of the central government is greater, so citizens do not have much power under this system. 

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

The system of division of power is to decentralize the power of the central government to local governments to establish two relatively autonomous governments, the federal government and the local government, and these government officials are all representatives elected by the people. The country’s constitution allocates legislative, judicial, and executive powers to the two levels of government and ensures that they are mutually independent to a certain extent. This enables checks and balances of power between the federal government and various local governments, prevents power from being held in the hands of one person or a group, and protects people’s freedom. For example, according to Reading 7.2, the author explained the way modern democracies divide government power. The author writes, “a system like this requires that different levels of government cooperate, because the institutions at each level form an interacting network. In the U.S. federal system, all national matters are handled by the federal government, which is led by the president and members of Congress, all of whom are elected by voters across the country” (The Division of Powers, par. 3). Therefore, the system of division of power allows the federal government and the state governments to have a mutually restrictive and balanced relationship, enabling citizens to influence the policies of government departments through voting. 

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 enacted legislation, provided financial resources, and the president and executive agencies issued rules and regulations to stimulate the economy and promote strong public health regulations. This made the state government to act in a similar way, enacting legislation to respond to the pandemic, considering that local governments respond to the pandemic in different ways, and let some of the measures depend on the local by state law. According to “Responses to COVID-19 in the United States,” the author expressed the actions of legislative and law enforcement agencies at the federal, state, and local levels during the pandemic. For example, the author writes, “The federal government has issued broad guidance and provided financial resources, leaving the states to create their own, more specific, directives. From there, local governments have enforced more detailed plans based on the guidance received from state and federal officials, limited by the authority granted to them by their state governments” (Responses to COVID-19 in the United States, par. 79). Thus, this is how the federal government will affect state and local governments during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Works Cited

“Responses to COVID-19 in the United States.” November 2020. https://www.loc.gov/law/help/covid-19-responses/us.php

LiLiu

Professor Arto Artinian

POL100 (0502): Discussion Board 6.2

June 9, 2021

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

“Faction” reminds me of the concept of ideology, which is a group of people organized together with their own clear political concept.

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!

According to Federalist #10, the author expressed that the source of wealth is from the faculties of men, which means the wealth of the rich comes from their ingenuity. The author believes that the rich are born with better talents and genes than the working class. Therefore, the source of wealth is from the ingenuity of some people in the excellent race (whites). In addition, the author James Madison pointed out that the difference between Americans of different classes is that white people are better than Americans of other ethnic groups. Therefore, the wealthy class are almost all white. Also, James Madison explained the reason why the poor whites cannot become rich is because these poor whites are born without the ingenuity of the rich whites, which leads to the poverty of these whites. Therefore, according to Federalist #10, the author James Madison used racism to explain why there are differences between different classes of Americans. 

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

I disagree with James Madison’s explanation of wealth and poverty because racism is just an excuse for the rich class to cover up their exploitation of the working class. They don’t want people from the working class to unite to threaten their interests, so the wealthy class will use various reasons to shift the contradiction of the working class against them. Thus, the affluent class uses racism as a tool to split the working class, which increasingly promotes the internal contradictions of the working class, and that achieves the purpose of transferring the contradictions between the rich and the working class. 

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 US government is to protect the interests of a few wealthy people from the majority of working people. This does not surprise me, because the core of capitalism is a social system based on private property of the means of production. Therefore, factions represented by a small number of wealthy strata naturally want to protect their own interests so that they can retain and increase their wealth. Moreover, this sounds different from the core mission of our social government today because under the leadership of many civil rights movement leaders, more and more civil rights movements make the government feel the pressure of public opinion. Let the wealthy class have to compromise in order to preserve most of their property. Although this is not enough to change the inequality between many classes, it gives the people and the government new goals.

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 the author dislike a (pure) democratic form of government? Hint: think about how this question connects with the social classes…

I am not surprised that Federalist #10 is not in favor of democracy, and supports a Republican (representative) form of government. Because the republican form of government can protect the interests of their minority white wealthy class and curb the rebellious spirit among the people. Moreover, they can unscrupulously exploit the surplus value of the working class through unequal laws, so that a small number of wealthy white classes can maintain and grow their wealth for a long time. According to “Democracy for the Few,” the author Michael Parenti explained that the Constitution protects a few wealthy classes. The author writes, “They were determined that persons of birth and fortune should control the affairs of the nation and check the ‘leveling impulses’ of the propertyless multitude who composed “the majority faction” (majority class). ‘To secure the public good and private rights against the danger of such a faction,’ wrote James Madison in Federalist No. 10, ‘and at the same time preserve the spirit and form of popular government is then the great object to which our inquiries are directed’”(Parenti, p 3). Therefore, “Federalist #10” by James Madison who dislikes a (pure) democratic form of government. 

LiLiu

Professor Arto Artinian

POL100 (0502): Discussion Board 5.3

June 9, 2021

1. Which statistic on wealth inequality in the US (discussed on p. 29) made the biggest impression on you? Explain why?

One of the statistics on wealth inequality in the US that made the biggest impression on me, which is “In the last twenty years, the 500 largest U.S. industrial corporations more than doubled their assets, while eliminating over 5 million jobs” (Parenti, p 30). This statistic made an impression on me because it reminded me of Reading 5.1, which is “How Capitalism Works” by Pierre Jalee. The author expressed that capitalists continue to exploit the surplus value of goods created by employees in order to achieve their goal of increasing wealth. As this statistic shows, the 500 largest industrial companies in the United States increase their surplus value by constantly oppressing existing employees and making them pay more labor, thereby allowing capitalists to earn more profits. Also, this makes these large companies do not need more jobs, and they lay off more employees. That makes existing employees feel more pressure, and they can only compromise with the owners. 

2. What could be some of the implications of living in a society that has such huge wealth inequalities? Do you see this dynamic getting played out in everyday life in our society? How so? Example?

I think living in a society with such huge wealth inequality will make society more inequality. Because the super-rich class at the top enjoys more and better resources, they can use wealth to turn into privileges. This has led to many problems of unfair resources in society. For example, according to “Invisible Child: Dasani’s Homeless Life,” the author introduces a child Dasani who comes from a working-class family and emphasizes that these working-class children are facing hunger and educational difficulties. The author writes, “children like Dasani were being pushed further into the margins, and not just in New York. Cities across the nation have become flash points of polarization, as one population has bounced back from the recession while another continues to struggle. One in five American children is now living in poverty, giving the United States the highest child poverty rate of any developed nation except for Romania” (Elliott, par. 19). In contrast, the children of the super-rich class only need to be promoted to the new super-rich by inheriting huge amounts of wealth. This polarization makes the contradiction between the super-rich class and other classes more prominent. However, since most people in society depend on capitalists, the power of the bourgeoisie has influenced American politics, resulting in other forms of oppression and inequality in society. 

Works Cited

Elliott, Andrea. “Invisible Child: Dasani’s Homeless Life.” The New Yorker,  Dec 9, 2013. www.nytimes.com/projects/2013/invisible-child/index.html#/?chapt=1

LiLiu

Professor Arto Artinian

POL100 (0502): Discussion Board 4.2

June 9, 2021

1. What is the distinction that Reading 4.3 makes between owners and employees? Give an example of each.

What is the distinction that Reading 4.3 makes between owners and employees? Give an example of each.

The difference between owners and employees is that owners profit by exploiting the value of employees’ surplus labor, while employees are people who sell their labor for owners and earn wages as living. According to Reading 4.3, the author Michael Parenti explained the definition of owners and employees. Owners get profits from the labor of employees, which they exploit. For example, the author writes, “You are a member of the owning class when your income is very large and comes mostly from the labor of other people, that is, when others work for you, either in a company you own, or by creating the wealth that allows your investments to give you a handsome return” (Parenti, par. 4). In contrast, employees are people employed by their owners, and they are exploited. They live on their own wages and salaries, but the wages are only a small part of the wealth created by their labor. For example, Michael Parenti writes, “Indeed, the only reason they are hired is so the owner can make money off their labor. If wages did represent the total value created by labor (after expenses and improvements), there would be no surplus value, no profits for the owner, no great fortunes for those who do not labor” (Parenti, par. 8). Therefore, the difference between owners and employees is, owners make money by exploiting the value of surplus labor created by employees. Employees are exploited. They sell the value of the labor they create to get a basic salary from the owner.

2. How do you understand the quote by Adam Smith on pg. 28? What is it saying about labor?

According to the quote about labor by Adam Smith, he believes that labor is the true standard for evaluating the true price of all commodities. I agree with his opinion, I think labor is that people create profitable value for goods through their own physical or mental efforts. Money is a nominal price to the value created by labor, which is used for transactions. For example, according to Reading 4.3, the author Michael Parenti writes, “What transforms a tree into a profitable commodity such as paper or furniture is the labor that goes into harvesting the timber, cutting the lumber, and manufacturing, shipping, advertising, and selling the finished product—along with the labor that goes into making the tools and whatever else is needed for production and distribution” (Parenti, par. 5). The author used an example to explain how labor transforms a tree into a valuable commodity. Therefore, I agreed with the quote by Adam Smith about labor. 

3. What are your thoughts on the main argument of Reading 4.4 that class is NOT an identity?

I think class is not an identity because class is divided according to people’s income, wealth, education, etc. which separates different social groups, and there is a dependent but unequal relationship between the exploiters and the exploited among different classes. Thus, class isn’t an identity, and it isn’t analogous to race, gender, et. 

4. How do you understand the argument Reading 4.4. makes when stating that “class structures are built around a close form of dependency”? What is this close form of dependency, and can you think of an example?

This close form of dependency means the relationship between capitalist class and working class, and they are exploiters and exploited. Capitalists gain more wealth by exploiting the value of workers’ surplus labor, so they are dependent on workers. That makes the workers have the power to resist the exploitation of capitalists. According to “Class Rules Everything Around Me” by Paul Heideman who explained that the relationship of interdependence between the bourgeoisie and the working class For example, the author writes, “This interdependence means that to be a worker is to always and everywhere be in a position of having your interests at least threatened by the capitalist that employs you. But it also means that workers everywhere have the potential power to force their employers to the table by threatening their ability to remain capitalists” (Heideman, p 6). Therefore, the relationship between capitalist class and working class is the close form of dependency. 

LiLiu

Professor Arto Artinian

POL100 (0502): Discussion Board 4.1

June 9, 2021

1. Do you notice any similarities in the way social class is discussed in readings 4.1 and 4.2? Do you notice any differences in the way these two readings DIFFERENTIATE between social classes?

The similarities in the way social class is discussed in readings 4.1 and 4.2 is the decisive factor that people define their own social class is their income. Also, this is one of the factors by which the social class is based on socioeconomic variables.

The difference between the two readings in the way of social classes is, the reading of 4.1 – “What Determines How Americans Perceive Their Social Class?” It is from a more comprehensive perspective such as income, education, age, race, and region, which explains people’s subjective definition of social class. For example, the 4.1 article writes, “income is a powerful determinant of the social class into which people place themselves, as is, to a lesser degree, education. Age makes a difference, even controlling for income and education, as does region, race, whether a person is working, and one’s urban, suburban, or rural residence” (Bird & Newport, par. 5). In contrast, the 4.2 article “Inequality and New York’s Subway” only uses household income data and only analyzes the census in the subway station area. Although income is an important factor in determining social class, the article in 4.1 provides a more comprehensive analysis of the factors that influence people to distinguish social class. 

2. Pick the station closest to where you live. Using the 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?

According to Reading 4.1, the nearest station closest to my life is 103 St – Corona Plaza, and the people closest there are middle class or working class. Because the household income data near the subway station is $ 47,560 in 2011, they are middle class or working class. I am not surprised by the answer, because my neighbors are mostly engaged in the service industry and construction industry. Therefore, this data accurately represents the people who live near me. 

3. Based on Reading 4.2, do you notice a general pattern about social classes in NYC?

According to Reading 4.2, which shows each station on the subway map corresponds to the average income level of the residents around the station. This made me notice that the social class in New York City is a region-based model, which means that there is a difference in income between urban residents and suburban residents. For example, the 7 train, the station with the highest income for residents is Grand Central-42 St, which is the most prosperous area in Manhattan, New York City. The average income for residents there is $131,786. In contrast, the same line of 7 trains, the station at 90 St-Elmhurst Ave, where the average income of residents around the station is only $37,190, which is less than one-third of the average income of residents living near the Grand Central station. Therefore, the social class model of New York City is a region-based model.