1.) Ruth Gilmore mentions the concept of “racial capitalism” quite vividly to highlight how racism is the sole reason behind why capitalism is the way it is. Capitalism only favors a certain racial minority, more specifically white individuals. If one were to look back at history, they would notice that whites own the “means of production.” They have the money to own and run major businesses and corporations. Their profit is made from the labor of their employees exploited in many ways. Despite such, whites never seem to lose because while their profit grows, they continue to have people aid in their profits. The people who find themselves being exploited are from different races; mostly black. They find themselves taken advantage of by their employer but cannot argue back because they need the job, the money to aid in their survival. Thus, whites continue to remain on top and the concept of racism remains present in the aspect of working or capitalism. I believe if other racial minorities were given the chance that white individuals have, the concept of “racial capitalism” would be less apparent. Capitalism requires inequality and racism counts on the same aspect, put together and it creates a certain race to dominate this kind of scene.  

2.) According to Gilmore, the prison system creates new “criminals” because the “elites” use their power to get what they want. Individuals who were already labeled as “criminals,” get targeted and they want this group to grow or expand. They want to overturn the sentences and be longer, have the list of behaviors that are deemed illegal to expand so more violations can occur, and have individuals who get out the system-reenter. If these people of power or elites were to keep having criminals enter the system, they would keep thriving off them because of profiting from entering the jails and prison departments. I agree with her view on this matter because individuals who gain the title of a “criminal” should serve their time and return to society or find a means of rehabilitation to prevent further offending. Everything about the prison system is to make more money while acting as if they serve their purpose of punishment.  

3.) In the last segment of Professor Gilmore’s video, she talks about the concept of “liberation struggle.” She defines it as “specific to the needs and the struggles of people where they are and that where has many many dimensions.” To my understanding, Gilmore was trying to explain that depending on where you live or visit, you will see distinct kinds of people but that have struggles because of where they live. For example, a woman who lives in a country within the Middle East would struggle to have equal rights; such as education. In America, women are free to attend school despite their gender. Although the topic is the same, there is an enormous difference in opportunity.  

1.) On the twentieth day of June in the year of 2011, marked a historic time period when the Supreme Court made a decision regarding the case of Betty Dukes v. Wal-Mart. Betty Dukes was among over 1.5 million females that worked for Walmart, the country’s largest private employer. Many of these females had accused the retail giant for discrimination against sex in pay and promotions. Thus, a lawsuit was put into motion and Dukes aimed to sue Wal-Mart for such. Various female workers had became aware of the fact that male employers were being treated better; a noticeable gap in salaries and limited promotion opportunities. Their case proved to be quite convincing because multiple studies were conducted to analyze the difference in pay over the course of the 13 years. Not to mention, it became evident that Wal-Mart was violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 which prohibits employment discrimination based on several factors; including sex. While the case took a long time to be settled, a conclusion was made on June.20th,2011. The Supreme Court had decided to rule in Walmart’s favor because the plaintiffs did not share enough in common to constitute a class. Basically, since the plaintiff included over 1.5 million female employees, the Supreme Court made it apparent that not all of the women dealt with the same issues of inequality in the company due their sex. For example, one female employee in a particular store would face discrimination of sex because of a manager but another would not and face another issue in relations to discrimination. So, not only would it proved to be difficult for all females to share their dilemma with the company but the Supreme Court cannot find a solution that would meet the needs of all. Overall, the Supreme Court had decided to turn down their point and focus on Wal-Mart who had a straight-forward statement which led to an easier solution.

1.) Every case that must be presented within a court is evaluated to determine which kind of court they must be heard in. In the court system, there is the “Federal” or “State” that can hear both about individual cases but for distinct reasons. Many cases are heard within the State court system and these cases usually pertain to civil and criminal circumstances. If we had to compare the court system to any type of elected branches of government, it is believed that the court system is better suited to handle an individual’s protection. Considering that the “State” courts are the first step in the process and handle approximately 90% of individual cases, it is safe to say that this is correct. State courts handle most cases that correspond to an individual’s trouble, such as felonies, misdemeanors, personal injuries, family law, etc… These are all but a few of the many dilemmas that this form of court hears daily. Many of these are issues that require one to hear an individual(s) out and promote justice to those that are deserving. Considering such a fact, elected branches of government hear cases as well but only for certain matters. Most of the time when they decide to focus on a case, it usually goes beyond an individual’s protection but a broader outlook. To name a few; cases that deal with the constitutionality of a law, disputes amongst two or more states, cases involving ambassadors and public ministers, etc… All cases are matters that affect the country instead of a single individual. Not to mention, they take on matters that are more controversial and require a bigger change. A prime example of a case that resembles such is Brown v. Board of Education. This was case where the U.S. Supreme Court declared state laws that established separate public schooling for students of different races to be unconstitutional. During this time, African Americans that had resided in the South of the country faced racial segregation and were not permitted to have the same opportunities as others. Being that the Supreme Court found this unconstitutional, it meant that they referred to the Amendments. The Amendments were made to protect individual freedoms, but it is a freedom that was stripped from these American citizens. Thus, these two forms of courts differentiate substantially. 

2.) An individual who has the potential to become a judge goes through the process of being appointed rather than elected. Typically, the process sometimes involves the President’s choosing from among a list of candidates that is maintained by the American Bar Association. After that, a discussion about their choice takes place in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Thus, there is a vote that must be confirmed by the full Senate. This process has been deemed by many as biased to Democrats or anti-democratic because Republicans usually have the upper hand on who gets elected. Given that most of these individuals that make up the Republican party are quite wealthy and are white, whereas the Democratic party comprise of Blacks. Each side has their own perspectives on certain matters and would want to elect a candidate that meets the needs of the wealthy individuals. Not to mention, when a “vacancy” occurs in a lower federal court, the President consults with that state’s U.S. Senators to make a nomination. This is also known as “senatorial courtesy,” the Senators would be in relation to the same party as the President. Making their choice biased and, in some cases, a Senator can oppose a nominee just by voicing their opposition. So, when you look at it from either angle, the reason for choosing judges this way will result in increasing the population size of a certain party and ensuring that they keep the same revolving interests. Republicans continue to dominate and this party is known to be full of white rich men that only want more individuals around them that have the same mindset; money. You can think of each side with their own side of people that share a common interest and goal.

1.) The First Amendment is considered to be quite “famous,” it is not only the very first of it’s kind to be made for the Bill of Rights, but it also withholds a fundamental liberty that is important to the country’s citizens. It served the purpose of ensuring that there would be protection for religious freedom and right to express your perspective in public. Considering that it instilled various things, it was broken into two parts for better comprehension. One of those parts is called “Establishment clause,” where Congress is prohibited from creating or promoting their own religion, or a “state-sponsored religion.” Thus, the “Lemon Test” was established by the Supreme Court, it was made from the case known as Lemon v. Kurtzman. This would be used for deciding whether or not a law or a government action that could possibly develop a particular religious practice should be allowed to stay. The Lemon Test evaluates a law or action by using three components and if it were to pass all three, it would be considered as constitutional and remain in effect.

2.) The action of burning the U.S. flag as “freedom of expression” became a controversial debate amongst many citizens. A country’s flag is supposed to serve as a symbol of unification and its sole identity. Gregory Lee Johnson was a man who participated in such an act because he was part of a protest. Many citizens would burn the flag for many reasons, one in particular was to share the distaste for the government’s policies. Despite being arrested and charged with “desecration of a venerated object” for the burning of the flag, it was deemed as unconstitutional. For example, according to the “MILESTONE” segment, paragraph 2 states, “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.” This quote from the text shares how the First Amendment protected Johnson’s action of burning the U.S. flag. There were many efforts made by Congress in an effort to solidify this action as unconstitutional but it never became a reality because it went against what the First Amendment stood for. Johnson was released and not charged for the “crime” that he was accused of.

3.) When someone says “I’m taking the Fifth,” this is referring to the Fifth Amendment’s protection against self-incrimination or the right to remain silent. An individual has the right to not give any evidence within court or to a law enforcement official so that they are not deemed as guilty or responsible for the accused crime.

1.) P. Williams essay revolves around an issue that has plagued the U.S.; terrorism. They begin by talking about the notorious September 11th terrorist attack, which was the bombing of the World Trade Center and Pentagon. While other attacks followed, it became evident that the country was dealing with a matter that posed as a threat to it and the citizens. The new type of war that Williams suggests is the way their way of dealing with terrorism. They became more fearful and with that, it made the U.S. start to move in a manner that exploited the Amendment’s that were made to protect individual’s basic rights. For example, according to paragraph 9 of the text, Williams states, “This brings me to the second aspect of our Constitutional crisis – that is, the encroachment of our historical freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. The establishment of the new Office of Homeland Security and the passage of the so-called USA Patriot Act has brought into being an unprecedented merger between the functions of intelligence agencies and law enforcement. What this means might be clearer if we used the more straightforward term for intelligence – that is, spying. Law enforcement agents can now spy on us, “destabilizing” citizens not just non-citizens.” This quote from the text shares how the government has chosen to breach citizens Amendment rights and justify it by declaring it is for their protection against terrorism. So, while the fight against terrorism is a war within itself-battling the violation of Amendments are another. Terrorism sparked a fear that made the U.S. want to have better security, a method that they felt was reasonable but exploited citizens right to having privacy.

2.) The “Roving Wiretaps” of the Patriot Act violates appears to have violated the Bill of Rights in a number of ways, the Patriot Act gives the government the ability to strengthen federal anti-terrorism investigations. Removing Wiretaps was one of the many methods that was used, it aimed to stop terrorist that were technologically sophisticated by having access to an individual’s cell phone. Then, they would be able to see the calls and messages of the terrorist phone and anyone else who may have been associated with this individual. This would then violate one’s privacy if they had any connection with the accused suspect. This violates the Bill of Rights because it breaks certain Amendments that protect basic human rights. The Amendment that it would violate is the Fourth because it states that the government cannot conduct a search without obtaining a warrant and showing probable cause in order to validate that the person did do the crime or had intention of doing so. They were tapping into people’s phone without consent, if they had a hunch that you were dealing with the suspected criminal-your phone would get exposed. I would also say that it violates the First Amendment, which is freedom of speech because people had a right to discuss what they wanted amongst each other yet they were being listened in on and sometimes, they’d share information amongst one another regarding the government’s vulgar behavior which would be used against them.

3.) “Sneak and Peek” Warrants is another method used within the Patriot Act that violated the Fourth Amendment. This is where a search warrant that is authorized by law enforcement, makes physical entry into private premises without the owner’s or residing occupants permission and knowledge. The Fourth Amendment prevents a law official the authority to walk in without a warrant or having proof of probable cause for accused crime.

1.) The United States citizens were a key component in ensuring that the government was established in a way that was suitable for their needs and desires. At the federal level of government, citizens can vote for representatives. For the confederation system, citizens withhold most power in this circumstance because it relies on the local governments. Lastly, for the unitary systems, citizens are not deeply involved in this part and leave everything up to their central government.  

2.) “Division of power” or separation of powers was established in the year 1787 by the founding fathers. It was a means of ensuring that the government continued to serve its citizens, being strong and fair whilst protecting individual freedoms. But they did not want the government to abuse its power, so when the constitution became in effect it concluded that the power should be separated. Thus, three “branches” were born; executive, legislative, and judicial. Each one composes of their own powers or responsibilities and a system of checks and balances. By having the government divided in this manner, it would prevent one branch from having too much influence over the other. Also, the other branches would be able to “check” each other whilst working in unison.  

3.) While the state and local governments’ jobs are to oversee the protection and wellbeing of their citizens, the federal government has the responsibility to ensure that the nation adheres to the rules and that there is protection for the country. The federal government cooperates with the state and local governments by providing the necessary funds to operate federal programs, such as affordable housing, health insurance, food assistance programs, etc… A prime example of how the federal government did this is when the COVID-19 pandemic came. New York state and local governments saw a high rise in unemployment rates because businesses were either being shut down due to the rapid spread or they lacked money to remain open. With this happening, many people lost their source of income and had to file for unemployment insurance. The amount of money that was distributed before the federal government intervened was quite small, especially since it was calculated based on several factors revolving around the state’s eligibility criteria. Regardless, the government sought to provide funding for various states-including New York. This would then allow people to gain benefits that included $500 extra on top of the original amount they were eligible for. This was not only a great justice for the people of New York but also, people were able to have money for various aspects of their lives.  

1.) The Constitution was believed to have been created in the year of 1787 with the intent of ensuring that it protected the country’s citizens and states. While it was believed that the opinion’s of all citizens was what aided in it’s creation, what became evident was that it did not truly include everyone. Reading 6.1 “A Constitution for the Few” by M. Parenti and reading 6.2 “Economic Interpretation of the U.S. Constitution” by Charles Beard, each created an argument regarding how one’s social class determined who was eligible to have a say in what the constitution should be. During this time, those with wealth or white men who owned property, created the constitution because they wanted a means of ensuring that their wealth continued to grow, be protected, and had minimal government interference. While they knew what they wanted, those who were classified as poor or the “working class” found themselves struggling to survive in a society that catered to people who were better off. This also meant that the two classes had different perspectives, what one wanted was not what the other saw as beneficial to them. For example, according to reading 6.1 “A Constitution for the Few,” paragraph 3 of page 5 states, “Major questions relating to the new government’s ability to protect the interests of property were agreed upon with surprisingly little debate. On these issues, there were no poor farmers, artisans, indentured servants, or slaves attending the convention to proffer an opposing viewpoint.” This quote from the text is a prime example of how the upper class sought to prioritize their needs first. Since this class composed of white men that owned valuable property, they wanted to ensure that the government’s power be used to protect their wealth. This obviously would not benefit the poor or working class because they do not own any property since they cannot afford it, making their needs a lot different from the upper class. Not to mention, despite the constitution being a means of including all citizens needs and rights, those of the working class such as farmers or slaves, could not attend the convention to protest because they cannot afford to take off from the jobs. On the other hand, there is reading 6.2 that focuses on the same stance of how a particular class dominates over the other one. Since the poor and working class consisted of people who are not as wealthy, this meant that basic rights were stripped from them. For example, according reading 6.2 “Economic Interpretation of the U.S. Constitution,” paragraph 2 of page 1 states, “In an examination of the structure of American society in 1787, we first encounter four groups whose economic status had a definite legal expression: the slaves, the indented servants, the mass of men who could not qualify for voting under the property tests imposed by the state constitutions and laws, and women, disenfranchised
and subjected to the discriminations of the common law.” This quote from the text focuses on individuals that make up the poor or working class category. These people were not able to vote, have a say when it comes to deciding who their future leaders will be. Not only is this injustice to them but also, falls back into the matter of how this class is not able to have a right; not in voting and not in the constitution’s creation.

2.) The social class structure of the United State’s in the earlier years comprised of the upper class or wealthy white men who owned valuable property. I believe that this class structure is what our society is like today because we can see quite a difference in how people are classified because of their amount of wealth. In our society today, we still have people of wealth-probably even more and they continue to grow and profit. Their businesses or corporations multiply, they seek to purchase products or create ones to be produced, and most of all, they have people who are in a lower class (such as working or middle) to work for them. Not only do they pay them much less than what their labor is worth but they are aware that they can get away with this because these individuals need their job in order to survive, a day without work can hinder their ability to afford various things they need. Many citizens across the country continue to believe that the wealthy gets wealthier and people who are not of that standard continue to suffer. Not to mention, considering the great rise in inflation, things that were a certain price have gone up substantially and the pay for many in other classes does not go up. Obtaining the American dream is in the hearts of many, the means of achieving it are quite far for them as well.

3.) The people who wrote the Constitution were so afraid of democracy because the people that compose the government are elected by the country’s citizens. The country is composed of people who are considered to be in different social classes; upper, middle, working, etc… These are all but a few names that classify various financial standings. Each one of these classes have people who want different things, someone who is of upper class standing would want the government to protect their property but someone in the working class would prefer financial help. Since everyone is obligated to vote on who they would elect as leaders, the country is composed mostly of people of lesser class and they would pick people that would think about their needs. Thus, the upper class would not have the government on their side and would not gain any benefits.

1.) A “faction” is considered to be political parties that consist of citizens that are motivated and united due to having common interests, whilst it is unfavorable to the rights of other citizens or the community. With this definition in mind, I believe that the concept that we have already discussed is political ideology. There are two groups; the conservatives and liberals who each have their own opinion on various matters, especially when it comes to the government. While one fears too much involvement from the government hinders American citizens ability to have “independence,” the other would not be in favor for it because they have a different perspectives on the matter.

2.) According to Federalist #10 by James Madison, the source of wealth that they discuss is due to the various “property owning levels” or the amount of valuable property one owns to establish their wealth on the social class spectrum. This will then keep a difference in thinking amongst men because while some have, others do not. The factor that that explains why some people get to posses wealth whilst others do not is an unequal distribution of property.

3.) I agree with Madison’s explanation of wealth and poverty because when you think of our society today, people who own property that is valuable such as business or corporation can ensure their wealth continues. Many of their businesses continue to multiply because they have individuals who are of lower class to work for them for pay that does not match the amount of work they do. By having these kinds of individuals continuing to ensure their success, they are unable to truly find an easy means of gaining their own property. Their pays are just enough to cover their personal expenses and they cannot afford to take a day off or else it deducts from the amount they need.

4.) The core mission or “first objective” of the United States government is the protection of property rights. This being the first priority of the government does not surprise me because the constitution was created solely due to social class, more specifically the upper class or the white men who owned property. They would want the government to ensure that they seek to protect their property because it is worth valuable money and continues their wealth. This does not sound different from what our society today seems to think the core mission of the government is because we still have a society that is shaped largely around the concept of social class. The rich seem to be getting richer and as the years go by, the amount of people that fall into the category’s of being not as wealthy continues to grow.

5.) Considering the questions and the discussion revolving around Federalist #10’s perspective, I am not surprised that they are not in favor of democracy and supports a Republican form of government. I say this because considering that there wasn’t a lot of people who owned property, the few that did had enough power to ensure that their money spoke for them. James Madison spoke about the concept of “faction,” which includes the division of people who believe in certain things. Clearly they would obviously pick a side as well. On the other hand, they would not want a pure form of democratic government because the upper class would suffer. Pure democracy is a democracy where the decisions are not made by the representatives but instead, be voted by the people. When we speak about social classes, the vast majority of people make up everything else besides the upper class. Since people are compose of different classes, their wants and needs would not be the same. For instance, upper class individuals would want the government would want to oversee protection for property whilst someone is of working class would prefer government help for financial means. All in all, people want to look out for their own best interests and want to see that it actually is being considered.

1.) In video 5.1 “Labor & Class Conflict,” it discusses two key concepts: means of production and labor. Although they each have their own respective definition, they reconcile with each other quite well because it refers to social class; specifically the working class. For starters, “means of production” are particular things that are necessary in order to produce a product(s). Usually the driving force behind this are human beings, regardless if they were to use something like machinery to speed up the process. On the other hand, “labor” is “the only thing that can increase the value for what you have,” according to Marx. In other words, it is the time that someone takes in order to produce a product. Basically, the more time that someone takes on creating a product-the more valuable it’ll be. The saying “time is money,” is correct because labor is “measured in time, hours, and minutes.” Usually products are “man-made” and since a person puts an immense amount of effort during the time that they are working to produce something, their efforts are “rewarded” in a way. The price tag that will follow the item will represent the amount of labor they’ve done.

-An example of “means of production”: In video 5.1: Labor & Class, he talks about how his Youtube video plays into this concept. Producing a video of his standard is no simple means because he shows various equipment that is used to ensure the production can be done. For example, a camera so he can have his face present in the video, a microphone to record his voice, a tripod for lighting, a backboard, editing software, and of course himself. Not only are these all factors in creating a video such as this one, but also considering it is the “means” that goes behind something to be created.

-An example of “labor”: In video 5.1: Labor & Class, he gives the example of a block of wood. A block of wood is nothing, it does not have any value as of yet because wood can be obtained anywhere and it is not made into anything. But when you add “labor” into the mix, that block of wood can obtain value because someone will put time and effort into making it valuable; like a chair. A chair requires an immense amount of time to make and is a product that will make money so it will be priced based on the amount of time it took and possibly the kind of wood that is used.

2.) Based on video 5.1: Labor & Class Conflict, “value” is considered to be how much something is worth. What makes something “valuable” is the time and effort that is put into creating the desired product.

3.) “Labor” and “value” are two concepts that were presented within the video in regards to the production of a product. To understand the relationship between the two, we must first come to define each of them respectively. Labor is considered to be time that someone takes in order to produce a product. On the other hand, value is how much a product is worth or will be sold for consumers to buy. Now, value is actually measured in a particular way that is connected to the amount of labor that is produced by someone. For example, according to the video it stated, “A product’s value is measured by how much labour it takes to produce under normal circumstances.” This quote from the video is an accurate definition of how these two concepts are connected. So, if a product were to be mass produced by machinery rather than a human, the machinery can produce the product in lesser time and provide more quantity. Whereas the human will take more time and provide less but with more effort compared to the machine. Thus, the value of the product will be different based on how it is produced. Not to mention, the skill that an individual has to gain in order to produce that product should be considered as well.

4.) From my understanding, there is a difference between the two concepts; “labor” and “labor power.” Labor power is supposedly the “ability to labor,” it increases the value of what you have and is apparently only found within people. Having the ability to work or labor power, requires that you are sustained by having the necessary food, clothing, and shelter so you can make it throughout each individual work day. So, considering that labor is something that human beings have always done in order to produce goods and provide services or simply-the physical act of working. Whilst labor power seems to be one’s capacity to work and how they are able to sell their efforts to the employer so they can support themselves through the pay that they obtain.

5.) “Surplus Value” is the distinction between the amount of money obtained through the sale of a product and the price it costed the owner of that destined product to manufacture such. It is an important concept in understanding our study of social classes because Marx made an important point in regards to capitalism. The goods and services that are provided from an individual for the company that they work for are in the best interests of the company or business that they work for. Despite the fact that the worker is paid, Marx mentioned capitalism; you are always being paid less than what your labor is actually worth. For example, according to the video it states, “That’s how capitalism works, you hire other people to increase the value of what you have and then you keep that extra value for yourself.” (Timestamp: 5:43- 5:50) This basically means that you continue to make the “rich” richer while you remain to be on the side of the working class spectrum or worst. People who own business or corporations that are worth significant value will want to ensure that they keep making money and that it grows, employees are that driving factor and will continue to have people regardless because there is always someone who needs a job to make money. An example that I can think of for surplus value is a person who works for a retail store. In a single day, they make a day’s work that consists of 8 hours and while the pay seems good to the person, it doesn’t actually represent the amount of labor that they did within that day.