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?

*Gilmore’s use of “whiteness” goes beyond skin color—it refers to the maintenance of historical social hierarchies. In racial capitalism, racism isn’t incidental; it’s built into the system. Economic structures that rely on inequality will continue to reinforce it.

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?

*The prison system serves as a tool of control rather than justice or rehabilitation. It is a component of a larger system that uses aggressive policing, underfunded schools, and a lack of social support to target marginalized communities. People are drawn into the system by these circumstances, and once they are there, a criminal record makes it very difficult to reenter society and find employment or housing. This creates a self-sustaining cycle by increasing the likelihood of going back to prison. In the end, the system makes money by keeping people confined.

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

*When Gilmore talks about “liberation struggle,” she means a long-term, collective push to build a better world, one where we care for each other instead of relying on punishment, which has repeatedly failed.

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.

*Due to their independence and lack of political influence, the legal system is better equipped to protect people than the elected branches of government. Although elected officials frequently base their decisions on votes or public opinion, judges are charged with enforcing constitutional rights, even when those rights are controversial. For example, The Supreme Court declared in Brown v. Board of Education (1954) that racial segregation in public schools was unconstitutional, in spite of opposition from numerous state governments. Black students’ rights were protected by the decision when elected officials refused to take action.

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.)

*Federal courts and the Supreme Court are frequently referred to as anti-democratic due to the fact that their judges are appointed rather than elected. Federal judges are not directly answerable to the public, unlike presidents or members of Congress, and they serve life sentences. Although it may appear undemocratic, there is a reason behind this structure. James Madison cautioned against factions/groups fightiing for their own interests at the expense of the general welfare, in Federalist #10. To ensure an independent judiciary free from political pressure to make just decisions based on the law, the framers intended for judges to be appointed for life. Additionally, the system is a reflection of the more wealthy and educated class that shaped the early American government. The objective is to safeguard minority rights and guarantee that the law is applied equally, even when it differs from popular opinion, despite the fact that it may appear undemocratic.

1.What did the Supreme Court decide in the Wal-Mart case? And more importantly, how did it justify its decision? (HINT: the key word here is “commonality” (and how it relates to “class-action lawsuit”). Try to understand what this legal term means, as it is key to the court’s decision).

*The Supreme Court ruled in Walmart v. Dukes that the women were not permitted to pursue a class-action lawsuit. The main reason was the absence of “commonality”—the requirement that every member of the class is affected by the same policy in the same way. The Court defended its ruling by pointing out that Walmart’s organizational design allowed managers a great deal of latitude in determining salaries and promotions, making the discrimination allegations too diverse to handle as a single case. The lawsuit was based on numerous individual decisions made by various managers rather than a single company-wide policy.

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?

*According to P. Williams’ essay, the war on terror is far from being like other wars. It’s not just about fighting armies or capturing territory, which is why she refers to it as a “war of the mind.” Instead, the focus is on addressing beliefs and fear. The enemy was typically known in previous conflicts, such as a nation or specific group. However, in the war on terror, people who create fear are the enemy, making it much more difficult to identify and fight using traditional methods.

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 Patriot Act’s “Roving Wiretaps” clause permits law enforcement to gather information on a suspect without sharing the precise device or location they are monitoring. This means that they can continue to follow someone without obtaining a new warrant, even if they switch computers or phones. The Fourth Amendment, which was created to protect us from random searches, seems to be violated by this. It gives law enforcement far too much authority to monitor people at random without a specific reason why they might suspect them or solid proof, which can come across as misconduct.

3.What about “Sneak and Peek” Warrants?

*The FBI is able to search someone’s home or place of business without immediately informing them because of “sneak and peek” warrants, also referred to as delayed notice search warrants. It takes a long time, if anything, for the subject of the investigation to learn about the search. Although these warrants are intended to safeguard an investigation, they give reasons for serious concerns. It feels like a privacy invasion because it takes a long time for people to question the search or even determine whether their rights have been violated. People end up in a situation where they are unaware of what is going on with them.

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

*Congress is prohibited by the Establishment Clause from establishing or endorsing a state-sponsored religion, which now includes the states. And it prevents the government from favoring one religion over another or none at all. The Lemon Test, developed by the Supreme Court in the Lemon v. Kurtzman case (1971), impacts whether a law or government action that supports a particular religious practice should be permitted. For a law to be considered constitutional, it must fulfill three conditions:It must not lead to an excessive level of government interference in religious affairs. It would need to be unbiased, not encouraging or discouraging religious activity. The law or action must be justified in a free of religion or nonreligious way.

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 American flag counts as First Amendment-protected symbolic speech.At the 1984 Republican National Convention in Texas, Gregory Lee Johnson protested by burning a flag. He was arrested for “desecration of a venerated object,” but the Supreme Court reversed the decision. The Court found that burning flags is an expression that is protected by the First Amendment.

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

*The Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution refers to the right that people have when they say, “’I’m taking the Fifth”. This amendment guarantees that people cannot be forced into testifying against themselves in criminal proceedings by requiring them to provide information that could implicate them. It is frequently used when someone decides to keep quiet in court in order to prevent being forced to testify against themselves.

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

*By choosing representatives to act on their behalf at the federal and state levels, citizens actively participate in a federal system. The main way that citizens participate in a confederation system is at the state level; the federal government is comparatively weaker and has little power over individual citizens. However, because power is concentrated in the central government, which has considerable influence over decisions that affect the people, citizens have less direct involvement in the system as a whole.

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

*The division of powers system describes how responsibilities of the government are distributed among several branches so that no one branch has excessive authority. Because each branch supervises and restrains the others, this division aids in preserving the balance of power. The division of social classes, in which no one class has complete control over the others and each class has differing degrees of wealth, power, and resources, could be compared to this

    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.
*Through financial assistance like grants and aid, the federal government has an impact on state and local policies. By offering financial assistance, bolstering healthcare systems, and guaranteeing vaccine distribution, the federal government significantly influenced the reactions of the state and local governments of New York during the COVID-19 pandemic. In order to help states and local governments manage public health, put safety measures in place, and recover from the crisis, the federal government also passed laws and policies. These steps were crucial in assisting New York and other states in overcoming the obstacles posed by the pandemic

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.

*As mentioned in Readings 6.1 and 6.2, wealthy white men who had considerable sway over other social groups drafted the Constitution. According to Reading 6.1, the working class of the era was careless and dependent on government benefits like paper money, which continues to influence contemporary perceptions of the working class as needy. This perspective, however, oversimplifies the varied realities of today’s working class.

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

*Reading 6.2 emphasizes how the Constitution excluded women, men who did not own property, slaves, and indentured servants, among other marginalized groups, which served to further solidify the concept that the wealthy elite held the majority of the power. The social class gap still exists today, despite efforts by laws to address inequality, which do not entirely eliminate exclusion or discrimination. Even though the working class is diverse, it continues to be portrayed as being dependent on government assistance. Plus, there has been a reversal rather than advancement in handling inequality, as evidenced by the reversal of various working-class protections.

    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.

*Democracy was feared by the creators of the Constitution because it would make it harder for them to maintain control over the majority working class. Even though money still has an impact today, the majority of people in a democracy can change the balance of power, illustrating the persistent conflict between popular representation and wealth.

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

*Divisions between groups are caused by factions, which is related to the idea of labor and industry development. Factions classify individuals, particularly with regard to the division of labor-based 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 less ….”

*According to Federalist #10, those who are poor have less access to wealth (private property) since it is retained in the hands of the already wealthy. In order to survive, the working class must sell manual labor, which creates a vicious cycle, as James Madison explains. The working class is motivated to work harder by liberty, diversity among individuals makes numbers stronger, and faculties are used to keep groups apart so they can’t challenge the wealthy—an ongoing obstacle.

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

*Although the reading provides a clear explanation of wealth and poverty, I only partially agree with it. It doesn’t accurately represent how someone who isn’t familiar with wealth and poverty would be described.

    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.

*Preventing violent faction conflicts and maintaining social stability are the main goals of the U.S. government. It protects social classes from one another and manages power between them. In contrast to the early government, which was completely exclusive, division is harmful and is frequently concealed by the government’s efforts to cover up exclusion today.

    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…

*The opposition to democracy in Federalist #10 is not surprising. According to the document, the goal should be to control the effects of factions rather than trying to eliminate their causes. The issue is not resolved by taking away rights, and chaos results from letting factions turn into a riot.

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

*“The top 1 percent own between 40 and 50 percent of the nation’s total wealth (stocks, bonds, investment funds, land, natural resources, business assets, and so on), more than the combined wealth of the bottom 90 percent.”- I was most impacted by this statement because it made me realize how much wider the wealth gap is, than I had previously thought. In addition to changing how I see things, it helps me understand more fully the notion that people are either born into wealth or poverty.

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?

*There are significant impacts to living in a society where wealth gaps are very frequent. The working class has fewer options regarding where to live and work, while the wealthy control employment opportunities and technological advancements. Yet lower-income families are displaced, for example, when wealthy investors purchase affordable housing. Workers who rely on their jobs to survive are frequently taken advantage of by business owners in ordinary situations. Retail and fast food workers endure low pay, unfavorable working conditions, and unstable employment. Uber drivers and other gig workers can be readily replaced, while the wealthy keep gaining wealth and influence while remaining oblivious to the struggles of the working class.