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?

Ruth Gilmore says all capitalism is Racial capitalism. It not a thing but more of a relationship between capitalism and race. Looking at history and how capitalism developed through the western unionization. There was an understanding that those who own means of production knew that they’re different from the people they would exploit for labor. This created racial practice and a racial hierarchy. Which creates a systematic problem because now “capitalism requires inequalities and racism enshrines it.” When Ruth Gilmore say the only way to get rid of racial capitalism is when all whiteness disappears, she means when we stop seeing white as the set standard.

• 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? 

The prison system creates new criminals by essentially increasing sentences and allowing loosely worded definitions of crime. In doing this the criminal justice system is able to target marginalized groups. I agree with her views, just like Myeesha said the school to prison pipeline. I work in special education and something I hear frequently is “Special education the pipeline to prison” I actually did an advocacy project about it because unfortunately it does stand true.  

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

I understand liberation struggle to be a form of solidarity and creating a way to make solidarity, meaning creating movements or groups that are organized and prepared to fight these systems of oppression like justice system. Protest, marches, debates are all liberation struggles, they are all happening to make change and create unity within the society they live in?  

The supreme court ultimately ruled against Duke vs. Wal-Mart because it didn’t meet the requirements of commonality. There were so many women involved in the class action suit that faced all different types of discrimination so the supreme court found a loophole in wording and decided that all of these women’s complaints wouldn’t fall into the same category of discrimination. Some were denied promotions, some had inappropriate comments made to them, therefore it didn’t meet requirements of commonality

1. The court system is better suited to protect individuals because they consider an individual’s rights. They can consider the context of the situations in front of them, while elected branches of government can take their own personal beliefs or biases and use it against groups of people. The ICE sweeps happening all over the country are an example of elected branches of government being able to make decisions based on their biases and not protecting the rights of individuals. They are deporting people based on skin color and claiming they are dangerous gang members without proof or cause. 

2. I agree, the supreme court can be considered anti-democratic when a president has the power to appoint judges who are in his pocket, we see rights being violated and laws made to protect rights being over-turned. Presidents can appoint judges who benefit them and protect their decisions on outlandish things like taking away women’s reproductive rights. There is direct correlation between a president’s interests and who they appoint into positions of power, like a supreme court judge.

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. Williams says the new war is a war on terror, a war on emotions. A war on terrorism, is a war of the mind, rather than a war against a specific body of land, water, or resources. The war on terrorism is so loosely defined it leaves so much room for misinterpretation, which continues this cycle of fear, racism, and segregation. The war also tiptoes around violating some of our constitutional amendments. 

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? 

In my opinion, roving wiretaps of the Patriot Act seems to violate the first, fourth, fifth, and sixth amendment. Roving wiretaps can potentially violate the first amendment of anyone who comes in contact with the target and if people find out about roving wiretaps taking place they could stop speaking freely because of fear. I think it violates the fourth amendment because the roving wiretap provision allows the government to watch multiple devices without specifying which one they are watching and the fourth amendment requires any search or surveillance to be specific and based on. It also could violate the fifth and sixth amendments because you can’t exercise your right to remain silent if you are on recording saying something incriminating, and in turn that can violate your right to counsel and a fair trial because the government will already have your statements against you, incriminating you.  

3. What about “Sneek and Peek” Warrants?

Sneek and peek warrants allow the FBI to search a home or business before notifying the person or place of interest. This can violate the fourth, fifth and sixth amendment. This could violate the fourth amendment because the fourth amendment requires notice of a search, this protects people’s rights. It could violate the fifth amendment, if they have already entered your home and taken evidence without you knowing. This means you weren’t able to see or challenge the warrant and it can affect your right to due process. Due process is supposed to stop any violation of life, liberty, or property without proper procedures. Finally it could violate the sixth because you didn’t have a chance to call your lawyer or challenge the warrant, which violates your right to counsel. 

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

The Establishment cause prevents government from creating an official religion and it also prevents government from backing or claiming one religion as the official religion of the United States. The lemon test is a criteria that basically makes sure a law or government action doesn’t not require excessive government engagement, doesn’t not effect religious practices, and there must be a non-religious justification for the law.

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 flag is protected by the first amendment, but it wasn’t always. In 1984 Gregory Lee Johnson was arrested and convicted of desecration of a venerated object which was the flag. 6 years later the supreme court ruled his arrest unconstitutional because burning the flag is considered symbolic speech. 

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

When someone pleads the fifth is means they are invoking their right to remain silent, taking the fifth can prevent someone from incriminating themselves. 

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

In a federal system the power is split between central and state government and the citizens have a “voice”. We vote for state officials and we vote for presidents and such. In a confederation system the power is focused state to state, the main contact for citizens are their state officials and they heavily influence central government decisions. In a unitary system the authority is given to the central government meaning state officials have less power and citizens interact with central government voting in elections. 

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

Division of power is the system we use to divide governmental power nationally and sub-nationally. Our federal government would handle decision that would affect the entire nation, like foreign policy. While our state government handles decisions that would only affect the state, like education. While both handle different areas of the governmental decisions, both are expected to come together whenever it is needed and normally the federal governments say is the last word. 

• 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. 

The federal government heavily influences state decisions. During the COVID-19 pandemic the federal government issued specific rules that every state was to follow like social distancing and only essential workers were to go to work. They were also mask mandates, quarantines, and eventually for vaccines if you wanted to work in certain positions, like in a school. The federal government also helped New York financially with programs like The American Rescue Plan and the COVID relief funds.  

1. Faction would be similar to the conservative and liberal parties we discussed in passed modules. 
2. Federalist #10 describes a persons capabilities as the means of wealth. There capabilities allow them to acquire wealth by working or being a business owner.  Special talents can allow certain people to own private properties while others may never have those opportunites because they don’t have the skill required. 
3. I feel like I’m in the middle. Wealth is dependent on the skills or talents one has but at the same time people from backgrounds of inequality get overlooked easily and then they are never given the opportunity. 
4.  The first objective is to protect the “faculties” or the wealthy. It doesn’t sound different from our government. The trump administration has put all his friends in positions of power so basically protecting his faculties
5. The author would hate a pure democratic form of government because then the working class interests and ideas would need to be considered and protected.

1. The upper class created the constitution, wealthy white men who owned land. To separate them from poor farmers they had to own a certain percentage of land. The working class was left out. They also excluded Native Americans, women, people of African descent, white men that didn’t own enough land and slaves.

2. I feel as though the structure is the same. Especially with this administration, we see how money influences government decisions that benefit the wealthy. 

3. The wealthy were afraid of democracy because they wanted to stay wealthy and they wanted to benefit from the government and they wanted the government to protect their interests. 

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

The part that sticks out the most for me is when it speaks about the 40 percent of families that do invest and own stocks, yet still have little or no net value because of the debt they’re in. It just goes to show the cycle of poverty and how it continues. 

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?

Wealth inequalities greatens the divide between the social classes, in turn it creates feelings of hate and animosity on both ends. This is currently playing out in our society as we continue to watch the administration favor the top 1%