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?

According to Ruth Gilmore, she believes that capitalism will stop being racial capitalism when all the white people disappear from the story; however, “whiteness” symbolizes power and privilege. Therefore, the connection between “whiteness” and racism is historical and based on racial differences.

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? 

According to Gilmore, her interpretation states that criminals are actually being created by the criminal justice and prison system. She states that “the category of ‘criminal person’ can be perpetuated.” In my opinion, I agree with Gilmore’s statement that the prison system can perpetuate the category of “criminal person” because the prison system fails to address systemic issues that led to crime such as inequality, poverty and lack of education therefore, it neglects the opportunity for rehabilitation and prevention. 

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

Gilmore’s concept of “liberation struggle” is more historical and social therefore, it requires adaptation and commitment in order for growth, learning and transformation which will lead to pursuit of justice.

The supreme court ruled that Wal-Mart’s female employees cannot sue the company for being paid less than male employees. The female employees claimed that Wal-Mart’s corporate culture illegally discriminated against women regarding pay and promotion. The female employees came to a realization that they have been working at Wal-Mart for years and still haven’t been getting any promotion. Meanwhile, the male employees were reaping all the benefits. The supreme court assessed whether the case was consistent with federal rules of civil procedure. The class action lawsuit could not be certified because of insufficient evidence of the general discrimination policy. The court also found that the claims for back pay were improperly certified. 

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 because it is to uphold the rule of law and constitutional rights, “Miranda’s Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and his Sixth Amendment right to an attorney. In the opinion of the Court, because of the coercive nature of police interrogation, no confession can be admissible unless a suspect is made aware of his rights and then in turn waives those rights. For this reason, Miranda’s original conviction was overturned. Yet the Supreme Court considered only the violation of Miranda’s constitutional rights, but not whether he was guilty of the crimes with which he was charged.” However, the dual court system has both benefits and drawbacks; therefore, each individual has more than just one court system ready to protect his or her rights. 

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 therefore, the appointment of the federal judges which includes Supreme Court justices is designed to ensure judicial independence.The Supreme Court can be viewed as anti-democratic because its members are not directly elected by the people, and they serve lifetime appointments. This insulates them from public opinion and political pressure, allowing them to make decisions based on the Constitution and the law, rather than popular sentiment. Therefore, appointing judges should be free from political influence. However, “Federalist #10,” the framers of the Constitution were concerned about the potential for tyranny of the majority and the influence of factions. Appointing judges ensures that they are selected based on their qualifications, experience, and legal expertise, rather than their popularity or political connections. This system is intended to protect the rights of individuals and minorities, even when those rights are unpopular with the majority.

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?

P. Willams mentioned in her essay that the war on terror is a new type of a war which separates it from traditional wars by which she describes as “the war has been framed as one against “terror”- against unruly if deadly emotionalism- rather than add a war again specific bodies, specific land, specific resources” and therefore, a war that terrifies and causes fear, “the enemy becomes anybody who makes us afraid. Indeed what is conspicuous about American public discourse right now is how hard it is to talk about facts rather than fear.”

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 Bill of Rights which could lead to privacy violations of anyone who comes into casual contact with the suspect therefore,  they want Congress to require investigators to specify just which device is going to be tapped, or that the suspect be clearly identified, in order to protect the innocent from unwarranted snooping. 

3. What about “Sneek and Peek” Warrants?

“Sneek and Peek” warrants which is also called the “delayed notice” of search warrants therefore, the FBI can search a home or business without notifying the target of the investigation. 

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

The Establishment Clause was intended to separate church and state from prohibited the government from favoring one religion view over the other, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise” or perhaps favoring religion over non religion. The Establishment Clause is the first clause in our First Amendment which creates a foundation of religious freedom. 

Lemon test, deciding whether a law or other government action that might promote a particular religious practice should be allowed to stand therefore, it is categorized into three which are; the action or law must not lead to excessive government entanglement with religion; the action or law cannot either inhibit or advance religious practice; the action or law must have some secular purpose.

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

Yes, burning the US flag is protected by the First Amendment which was a form of symbolic speech.  Gregory Lee Johnson, a member of various pro-communist and antiwar groups, burned the US flag in 1984, as part of a protest near the Republican National Convention in Dallas Texas. He was arrested and charged with “desecration of a venerated object” along with other offenses and then eventually convicted of that offense.

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

When someone says “I’m taking the Fifth” means that they are protecting their rights under the fifth amendment of the US Constitution therefore, it is a protection against self incrimination or perhaps the right to remain silent. 

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

In the federal system, power is a division between larger and smaller governments to handle national importance in the country, in the confederation system the smaller government has more power giving the people more freedom of speech, whereas, the unitary system one government is in control and the citizens have no power.

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

The division of power divides the government into three different branches and those are legislative, executive and judicial therefore to share power and to have every system carry out its own appointed tasks and responsibilities for the country. However, federalism divided power between two levels of government which are national and subnational. 

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.

One way the federal government could have influenced the state of government was through the distribution of grants for those who were unemployed, distribution of masks, tonics and sanitizers and much more to prevent the virus from spreading. 

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

Faction reminds of political ideology which is where people share common beliefs, ideas and interest which according to J. Madison arose from unequal distribution of property or wealth. 

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! HINT: focus on the passage that begins: “The diversity in the faculties (WHAT DOES FACULTIES mean or refer to?) of men, from which the rights of property originate, is not les….”

According to Federalist #10 by James Madison, the source of wealth that is private property was discussed as the diversity in the faculties of men, from which the rights of property originate. However, for the upper classes they had the opportunity of owning properties and factories. The upper class have advantages of private hospitals, better education systems (private schools) and resources. Therefore, it was the unequal distribution of facilities. Overall, faculties referred to natural skills and talents which led for the upper class to be successful.

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

I do agree with this explanation of wealth and poverty because the upper class have talents, skills and the resources while others may struggle to meet that level because of lack of resources, talent, skill and struggle to meet their economic needs.

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.

According to Federalist #10, the core mission “first object” of the US government is to protect and secure the rights of its citizens and also property, “From the protection of different and unequal faculties of acquiring property, the possession of different degrees and kinds of property immediately result. 

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…

No, I’m not surprised that Federalist #10 leans more towards or in favor and support of the Republican representative form of government because it’s controlling the effects of faction and fulfilling promises to the American people. The purpose is to maintain the economic system and social class. The author dislikes a pure democratic form of government because “pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit no cure for the mischiefs of faction . .”

1. Based on the arguments presented in Readings 6.1 and 6.2, which social class wrote the Constitution, and which class was excluded and not allowed to participate in this process? In your comment, make sure you clearly specify the difference between the two classes by giving examples from the readings.

The wealth owning capitalist class wrote the constitution which set up the United States government and the social class that were not allowed to participate in writing the constitution were the working classes or the non-wealthy classes. They were excluded and were called the disenfranchised by Charles Beard. They were not permitted to exercise their input in shaping what the government system would be because the wealthy were acting from their own economic and political interests and they didn’t want to create a system of government that might protest the interests of the working class. 

2. Would say that the social class structure of early United States society was the same as ours today, or different? Explain.

In my opinion, I would say that the social class structures of the early United States were not the same as ours today. It is completely different based on how the upper class has been increased while the middle class has been decreased due to wealth dispersion. 

3. Why were the people who wrote the Constitution so afraid of democracy? Hint: think about how to answer this question by discussing it in terms of social classes.

The founders who wrote the constitution were so afraid of democracy because they believed that too much democracy can be harmful. Therefore, to protect the wealthy minority against the “Tyranny of the majority.”

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

Only 90 percent of American families have little or no net assets which made the biggest impression on me and that is because most people live from paycheck to paycheck and can’t afford to put aside an asset. Most Americans struggle financially and that is struggling from poverty which cannot meet basic needs to provide for their families. 

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?

Reducing economic and social mobility could have negative implications of living in a society that has huge wealth equalities. However, the wealthy may have luxurious housing, better education/private schooling, private hospitals, better job opportunities whereas, the non wealthy people would have the opposite and little to no benefits compared to the luxurity. Yes, definitely see this dynamic playing out in everyday life in our society. Some people in the community are wealthy off and get better/more opportunities and benefits.