1. Ruth Gilmore says that capitalism will stop being racial capitalism, when all the white people disappear from the story. What’s the connection between “whiteness” and racism, do you think? 

First Ruth Gilmore needs to take a step back and discover that saying all white people need to disappear even if she just means the ones that are capitalist is just about as racist as she claims they are, and also ALL white people is a very bold statement. But moving on, Whiteness and racism stem from the fact that white people held black slaves for quite some time, politicians, land owners, and lots of white people did so, and even when slavery was removed the white people in power made everything harder for all minorities, especially black peole. So the connections stem from there for sure. 

2.Gilmore makes the point that criminals are actually being created by the criminal justice and prison system (she says “the category of ‘criminal person’ can be perpetuated”). According to Gilmore, how does that happen, how does the prison system create new “criminals“? Do you agree with her view?   

I agree to an extent, when you are there the environment is negative, you got yourself there, and chances of you coming back are likely. Sadly. The prison system is indeed very toxic, as it’s been shown throughout time, and even ex-prisoners have made it out. One I follow on social media tells stories all the time and tries to inspire youth not to make the same mistakes. Now as for how you get in prison, to begin with, there is definitely their share of wrongful convictions and unfair trials. But if you get in there on your own criminal activities that’s your fault, you can only blame yourself that’s how you improve upon yourself. As for being created in prison, that would be slightly incorrect because they were criminals when they got there( in most cases). 

3. Describe how your understand what Prof. Gilmore – in the last part of her video – calls “liberation struggle”? 

Liberation struggle in my understanding is the struggle it takes to liberate the people into knowing that it’s okay to fight back against wrongs done by higher-ups like government officials even people who just think they are above you for some reason. You don’t have to sit there and take it, you have rights. In this case, she is definitely talking about the African American struggle for liberation. 

The court dismissed the Walmart case, they decided they did not have enough evidence to classify it as a class action lawsuit. When discharging the case they told the women they did not have enough in common for it to be considered a commonality. To be something “clearly” not given cause of obvious reasons. A class action lawsuit is described as something that is being fought for that takes away human rights. To deny, this meant the women didn’t deserve to get paid the same as a man which is just bull, it’s Walmart how much can the things you do for your job differ? ( I am not putting Walmart or any retail worker down, or don’t mean to sound like I am, I am just stating facts about jobs within retail ).

When thinking about our government, I definitely think of unfairness, whether that be with certain people appointed or how they deal with issues in our society. What is unfair is you don’t know what said person will do with power until they’re on the job. They do not have to give us what we want, but they are held accountable if they are elected officials. The only accountability we have as citizens is to vote them out of office.  To become a federal judge said person needs to be appointed by the president and the approval of the Senate(Which we vote into office). So in a sense, some of this is anti-democratic because we live in a democratic republic and we the people have the right to vote for members of the senate that (should) speak for us, if they don’t for whatever reason, the people have the power to vote them out when the time comes.

1. What was new with terrorism as an idea of war is how angry it made everyone. Members of our society so angry we threw away some of the countries beliefs. I think it was way different from traditional wars because the wars we usually had were on a battle field, this one was on people just going to work doing their usual daily thing. 9/11 caused a whole new type of paranoia. 
2. It sort of violates the 4th amendment which mentions unreasonable searches and seizures, which would apply to a wire tap. Although if the government need to wire tap you, you must be doing something wrong…(jokes). And It would violate it because theyre listening and “spying” on you without consent. Although once again you must of done something for them to want to bug you.
3. Sneak and peek warrants would also violate amendment 4 breaking into your house without your knowledge. Failure to give notice is a violation and most government agencies do not ask because they think they have that sort of power but are also breaking some sort of law to catch someone doing something they aren’t supposed to be doing. 

1. The establishment Clause is an establishment made by the government that they can never establish a specific religion citizen would have to follow. At the same time, the lemon test is a breakdown of specifics involving Church and state. Meaning whatever your church requires or does on a daily must meet specific legal requirements and must not be illegal.

2. It is protected by the first amendment, its a figure of speech and in America we have free speech to a certain extent (maybe not so much now). This was decided in Texas V. Johnson, where Johnson burned an American flag in revolt against Ronald Raegan. In his defense Raegan had some iffy moments I believe. 

3. This means someone that could give the answer to something choses not to give that information out. In the FIFTH amendment it states the government cannot force you to give out criminal evidence about yourself, it is your choice to do so. So pleading the fifth means you chose not to. In one sentence to sum up it means you CHOOSE not to speak.

1. In a confederation system, citizens have the most power due to the lack of other local governments. In a federal system, citizens have a choice in representatives, meaning they get to vote them in based on who they like most, and could possibly even get them booted. And last but not least in unitary systems citizens are often left out of big decisions and just let their government call the shots. These are all huge differences in the participation of their citizens. It is wild to think that in some places politics works this way. 
2. The division of power is splitting the power the government has into different categories so it does not all fall onto the leader of the country. For example, there are multiple branches of government not including the president. The reason for the division is to keep the government from having a concentration of power. Something cannot be super powerful without having all its parts. 
3. Federal government shapes actions by providing funds to state and local programs, like health care, cleanliness in the city, and keeping roads safe/streets safe. Things like that. So during covid, they provided help with issues like health, keeping the city safe from most ways to catch covid including options to eat outside, shutting down schools, and providing fewer ways for citizens to catch anything. Along with helping citizens personally, paid sick leave, food options, and lots of health protocols.

1. What does faction remind me of… I would say social classes, class hierarchy, and political groups. 
2. Faculties are mental or physical abilites thatbelong to people, unique talents, this then is protected by the government. I think Madison is saying it depends on who you are and how you handle business with higher uppers that makes or breaks a successful wealth owner. 
3. Ill be honest, James Madison has too many words on the page for me to fully understand what he is getting at, but it sounds very logical he basically is saying money comes from working, or from owning property but not everyone has the opportunity to benefit from owning property.  It also depends on what kind of property it is, how you got that property, and what you do with that property. 
4. To divide its power so all is equal for its citizens. I believe we have forgotten what we were originally trying to make when we tried building this country the first time, now in democratic and republican parties there is corruption, there is also corruption in just about every area that has been given power. The Government does not truly care for us as it once did. We can see this in the poverty rate, how the police handle things, their handling of climate change, school shootings and how we handle them despite many signs their are some messed up children attending schools across america. Thats just off the top of my head.  
5. I am only sort of surprised, Since weve been studying these documents for years ( you usually study them in highschool depending the class) I think because I am older I have more of an attention to detail. But being republican in this time wasn’t rare, its actually a very popular belief and it isn’t exactly like being a republican today. The author would dislike a democratic party because that would give the lower class a bigger power, in a democratic world you have the citizens make or be part of bigger situations, where as a republican does whats best for everyone. And at this time they would sport this more, wealth owners prefer it(Madison and all the founding fathers) as well as other important members of society at this time.

1. In Document 6.1 & 6.2 it states only wealthy people or land owners could participate in the building of the constitution. This means that any kind of poorer member of society was not allowed to participate in this build. “In the period from the American Revolution to the Constitutional Convention (1776–1787), the big landowners, merchants, and bankers exercised a strong influence over politico-economic life, often dominating the local newspapers that served the interests of commerce” stated on page 5 of 6.1  states wealthy politically involved members of society had great control of everything they could have control over.  “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.” stated on the first page of 6.2 shows the wealthy intended on keeping not only slaves but poorer men, women in general and indentured servants down below them, that they did not compare to them. (Which is unjust).
2. I would say our social class issues are a bit different but also sort of the same as this time that we’re learning about (Around the time of the Constitution). Back then there weren’t as many resources for the poor, not to mention the men and people of that time were ruthless they didn’t care about anyone that wasn’t their own. Today a majority of people have their freedoms, so that has changed. So has the resources we have, such as social security, financial aid, tuition payment, and funds. All that. I would say there definitely still are people who use their money for corruption, but also a lot of men and women with money trying to help the less fortunate. 
3. Good question. The constitution writers were afraid of democracy because democracy means the people have more power over the lower class people as well as everyone else, whereas in a republican area the power the government would have would come from the people and has a less likely chance to become corrupt (Even though both are now heavily corrupt).

1. The one statistic that caught me off guard was that 90 percent of Americans have little to no assets. It just makes you realize how many people are in similar lifestyles, yet every one of those lives is also completely different…
2. I see it every day, homeless people in the subway, homeless people on drugs, outside. Not everyone is to the point where they’re homeless but it really affects me when I do see a homeless person because i see them not getting the help they deserve. Some don’t have money to pay for the medicines they need, which would cause us to be scared because they act differently. Not only are there a lot of issues with homelessness but people with low money income live meal to meal check to check, it is scary. And then there are people like Elon musk and Jeff Bezos who have enough money to help everyone, and still make money, as we learned in today’s readings.