1. Ruth Gilmore explains that racism and “whiteness” are connected because society was built in ways that gave more power and advantages to white people while hurting other groups. In the video, she says racial capitalism uses race to separate people and treat them differently. She believes racism is part of larger systems in society, not just the actions of one person being mean to another person.
2. Gilmore says the prison system can create new “criminals” because once people go to prison, they are treated like criminals even after they leave. They may not be able to get jobs, homes, or support, which makes life very hard for them. Because of this, some people end up going back to prison again. Gilmore says the system keeps the “criminal person” category going instead of helping people change their lives. I agree with her because if people are always treated badly after prison, it can be hard for them to start over.
3. I understand “liberation struggle” as people working together to make society more fair and equal. In the video, Gilmore talks about communities fighting against racism, unfair treatment, and prisons that hurt people. To me, liberation struggle means helping people and trying to build a better future where everyone is treated like a human being.

In the Wal-Mart case, the Supreme Court decided that the women could not move forward as a class-action lawsuit. The main reason was because of something called “commonality.” In the video, it explains that commonality means everyone in the group must share the same problem in a way that can be answered all at once but the court said the women did not meet this requirement. Although though many of them claimed discrimination, they were working in different stores, under different managers, and had different experiences. This is what made the court argued there was no single, common issue connecting all of their claims together. So basically, the Court justified its decision by saying that the case was too different across individuals, and without strong commonality, it could not be treated as one big group lawsuit.

1. The court system is often better at protecting individual rights than elected branches because judges are not elected and don’t have to worry about public opinion or politics. According to the OpenStax American Government 2e reading on the dual court system, courts are designed to interpret the law and make decisions based on the Constitution, not what is popular at the moment. This allows them to protect minority rights, even when most people might disagree.

For example, the Brown v. Board of Education decision ended school segregation. At that time, many elected officials supported segregation because it was popular in certain areas. However, the Supreme Court ruled that segregation was unconstitutional, protecting the rights of Black students. This shows how courts can defend individuals even when elected leaders fail to do so.

2. Some people say the Supreme Court is anti-democratic because justices are not elected by the people. Instead, they are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate, as explained in the federal court system readings. Because of this, the public does not directly choose them.

I understand why people think this, but I don’t fully agree. The reason judges are appointed is to keep them independent from politics. If judges had to run for election, they might make decisions based on what voters want instead of what the Constitution says. The readings explain that federal judges serve for life, which helps them stay neutral and focus on the law.

Connecting this to Federalist No. 10, the government was designed to protect against factions and powerful groups controlling everything. By not being elected, judges are less likely to be influenced by wealthy or popular groups. However, at the same time, the people who appoint judges like the President and Senate often come from higher social classes, which means those groups can still have strong influence over the courts. So, while the Supreme Court may seem less democratic, it is structured this way to protect fairness, stability, and the rights of individuals.

1. P. Williams explains that the war on terror is different from traditional wars because it is not fought between two countries with clear armies or battlefields. He explains that it is against terrorist groups that are spread out across different countries and do not follow normal rules of war. This makes the enemy harder to identify, and the war has no clear beginning or end, which is very different from past wars.  

2. Roving wiretaps seem to violate the Bill of Rights because it allows the government to follow a person and listen to their communications without needing a separate warrant for each device they use.  This can violate the Fourth Amendment, which protects people from unreasonable searches and requires specific warrants. Since roving wiretaps don’t always clearly specify the exact device or place being searched, they can be seen as too broad and invasive. Some people think that it gives the government too much power to monitor people without enough boundaries.  

3. “Sneak and Peek” warrants allow the government to search someone’s home or property without telling them right away.  Delaying notification can make it easier for the government to search secretly, which many believe violates privacy rights and due process protections. Which makes it suspicious because in the Fourth Amendment, people have the right to know when their property is being searched. 

1. The Establishment Clause means that the government cannot create or support an official religion. It is meant to keep religion and government separate so that all religions is treated equally. The Lemon Test comes from a Supreme Court case and is used to decide if a law violates this clause. For a law to be allowed, it must have a secular purpose, not mainly promote or block religion, and not create too much involvement between government and religion.  

2. Burning the U.S. flag is protected by the First Amendment. The Supreme Court case “Texas v. Johnson” ruled that flag burning counts as symbolic speech, which is a form of expression. Since the First Amendment protects freedom of expression, the government cannot punish someone just for burning the flag as a form of protest.

3. I’m taking the Fifth” means a person is using their Fifth Amendment right to remain silent so they don’t say anything that could get them in trouble. The amendment protects against self-incrimination, meaning you cannot be forced to give evidence against yourself. 

1. In a unitary system, the national government has most of the power, and local governments depend on it for authority. In a confederation system, most of the power is held by the states or smaller governments, and the national government has very little power. In a federal system, power is shared between the national government and the state governments, so citizens are connected to both levels of government.  

2. The division of power means that government power is shared between the national government and the states, that is called federalism. It helps balance power so that both levels of government have authority.  

3. The federal government can shape what states and local governments do by working together with them and helping solve national problems. This cooperation between levels of government is part of federalism. During COVID-19, the federal government influenced states like New York by giving guidance and support while states carried out many of the policies and actions to respond to the pandemic.

1. According to the readings, the Constitution was mainly written by wealthy property-owning men, such as merchants, bankers, landowners, and slaveholders. The 6.1 reading explains that before the Constitution was written, big landowners, merchants, and bankers already had strong influence over politics and economic life.  It also says that other groups were excluded from political participation like slaves, servants, women, and many men who could not meet property requirements for voting. All of these people were disenfranchised and not represented in the Constitutional Convention. This shows the difference between the two classes, the wealthy property owners had political power and representation, while the poorer groups did not.

2. The readings show that the early American society was divided between economic groups, especially between property owners and people without property. The 6.1 reading explains that society included wealthy landowners and merchants on one side, while many ordinary people were poor farmers, artisans, tenants, and indentured servants who often struggled with debt and low incomes. Reading 6.2 also describes several social groups based on economic interests, such as small farmers, large landowners, slaveholding planters, and people who owned personal property like money, securities, or commercial investments.  These readings show that early American society had different social classes based on wealth and property.

3. The readings explain that many leaders feared the political power of the none property owners. In the 6.1 reading it describes how some founders believed democracy could allow the “property less multitude” to challenge the interests of the wealthy. In other words I think that they were just scared that the interest of the those with no property will get in the way of the property owners “benefits.”Reading 6.2 also explains that there was conflict between economic groups, especially between creditors and debtors, and that many property owners wanted a stronger national government to protect their economic interests and prevent laws that favored debtors. Many of the people who wrote the Constitution wanted a government that would protect property and maintain order.

1. The concept that we have already discussed that “faction” reminds me of is Ideology. In the reading Federalist #10, a faction is described as a group of citizens united by a shared interest or passion that may go against the rights of others or the interests of the whole community which reminds me of ideology because its about shared beliefs or ideas that influence how people think about society and politics.

2. The reading Federalist #10 says that the source of wealth and private property comes from the “diversity in the faculties of men.”  The word faculties refers to the different abilities or talents people have. People have different abilities to acquire property, some people gain more wealth while others gain less.

3. The text explains that differences in wealth come from the different abilities people have to acquire property. I disagree, I think that wealth is influenced by other factors. For example there are many who are born into a family who already has property and resources. They had no abilities to be wealthy, they just so happened to be born in the family. Wealthy people are also set up with more resources to succeed than someone that is not.

4. According to the reading Federalist #10, the first object of government is the protection of the different abilities people have to acquire property. Which means that the government’s main role is to protect property and its rights.

5. The reading Federalist #10 argues that pure democracy cannot control the problems caused by factions. The author believes that a republic is better because it uses representatives elected by the people. These representatives can refine public views and make decisions for the country instead of having everyone rule directly.

1. The statistic that made the biggest impression on me was that the top 1 percent own between 40 and 50 percent of the nation’s total wealth, more than the combined wealth of the bottom 90 percent. This stood out to me because it shows that a handful of people own almost half of everything, while everybody else only owns the clothes they’re wearing to practically nothing in other words. The text also says that income and wealth differences are greater than at any time over the previous sixty years , which makes the inequality seem even more serious.

2. Living in a society with huge wealth inequality can cause a lot of problems. The text says that wealth and poverty are connected and that wealth actually relies on poverty to keep going. That means rich people’s wealth exists while other people struggle. The text also explains that giant corporations control jobs and technology. That shows how regular people can lose their jobs while companies focus on making more profit. We also see this in everyday life because the book says that real wages have stayed the same or gone down even though worker productivity has gone up. It also says that over seventy percent of families below the poverty line have someone who works full-time but still don’t earn a living wage. This shows that even when people work hard, they can still struggle, and that is one way wealth inequality shows up in real life.