From Reading 4.3, I understand the difference between owners and employees as who owns the business versus who does the work. Owners make money from profits, while employees earn wages for their labor. For example, a company owner benefits from the work being done, but the worker only gets paid hourly even if the business makes more money. This shows how power and money are not shared equally, which is something Michael Parenti explains.

The quote by Adam Smith made me think about how workers create most of the value, but they don’t receive most of the reward. Even though labor is what keeps businesses running, workers usually get less compared to owners. To me, this shows that labor is important but often taken for granted.

I agree with Reading 4.4 that class is not an identity. I see class more as a position someone has in the economic system, not who they are as a person. Paul Heideman helped me understand that class is about work, money and power not culture or personality,

When the reading says class is built around a “close form of dependency” I understand that workers depend on jobs to survive, while owners depend on workers to make profit. A simple example is needing a paycheck to pay rent, while the employer controls hours and pay. That dependency keeps the class system going.

1. I understand a Repressive State Apparatus as the way the state controls people using force or punishment. Louis Althusser calls it “repressive” because it works through laws, violence or the threat of consequences if rules are broken. A clear example for me is the police, because they enforce laws and have the power to arrest or punish people who do not follow them.
2. Ideological State Apparatuses are institutions that influence peoples thinking rather than using force. They work by teaching values, beliefs and ideas that make society’s rules feel normal or natural. An example of this is schools, media, religion and even family shape how we behave and what we believe in is right or wrong without us always noticing.
3. The biggest difference, in my opinion us how control happens. Repressive State Apparatuses use force or punishment, while ideological State Apparatuses use ideas and beliefs. RSAs make people obey because they are afraid of consequences. While ISAs make people obey because they believe the system is normal or fair.
4. An example of ideology that i notice is the belief that if someone works hard, they will automatically succeed. I see this as an ideological state apparatus because it encourages people to accept inequality and blame themselves for failure instead of questioning larger social systems.

1. I understand ideology as the beliefs and ideas that shape how people see the world and how society should work. Ideology influences what we think is normal, fair, or right even when we don’t realize it. It affects how we think about government, work, money and social issues.
2. In U.S politics, conservatives and liberals have different ideologies. Conservatives usually believe in less government involvement and more personal responsibility. Liberals believe the government should play a bigger role in helping people and reducing inequality. For example, liberals are more likely to support social programs, while conservatives may believe people should rely on themselves.
3. According to Louis Althusser, ideology is taught through institutions like schools, media and religion. These institutions help people accept the system as it is. For example, schools teach discipline and rules, which prepares people to fit into society without questioning it too much.

In the video, Ruth Wilson Gilmore explains that capitalism will stop being racial capitalism when “white people disappear from the story”. I understand this to mean that whiteness has been used as a position of power, while people of color are treated unfairly in society. Racism exists because economic and political systems were built to benefit some groups more than others and whiteness has often been at the center of those benefits.

Gilmore also argues that the prison system creates criminals instead of just punishing crime. This happens because certain communities are policed more heavy and once someone is labeled a criminal, it becomes harder for them to find jobs, housing or opportunities. This can lead people back into the system, creating a cycle that is hard to escape. I agree with her because the system focuses more on punishment than on helping people improve their lives.

Finally, when Gilmore talks about “liberation struggle”, I understand it as people working together to change unfair systems. It means fighting for justice, equality and better social conditions instead of relying on prisons and punishment. Liberation struggle is about creating a society where everyone has real opportunities to succeed.

In the Wal-Mart v. Dukes case, the Supreme Court basically said the woman couldn’t move forward as a class-action group. The main reason was the idea of “commonality”. The court said that in order to sue as one big class, everyone has to show they experienced the same kind of discrimination coming from one main company policy. The court felt the women couldn’t prove that. Wal-Mart didn’t have one official rule that discriminated against women, the decisions were made by thousands of different managers in different stores. Because of that, the court said the women didn’t have enough in common to be considered one “class”. So the court justified the decision by saying they didn’t all share a single common issue that tied their experience together. Without that “commonality”, they said the class-action lawsuit couldn’t move forward.

1. The court system is better suited to protect individual rights because judges are required to follow the constitution, not public opinion or political pressure. Unlike elected officials, judges do not need to win votes, so they can make decisions that protect minority rights even when those decisions are unpopular. Courts act as a check on the other branches by blocking laws or actions that violate personal freedom. For example if the NYC Mayor or City Council passed a law restricting peaceful protests in certain neighborhoods, a court could rule that the law violates the First Amendment and protect individuals’ rights to assemble.
2. The Supreme Court can be considered “anti-democratic” because its members are not elected and serve lifetime terms. This means they do not directly represent voters or respond to majority opinion. However, this design is intentional. The purpose is to keep judges independent from politics so they can protect constitutional rights without worrying about elections, campaigns or pleasing certain groups. Federal judges are appointed instead of elected to prevent the “tyranny of the majority” which is what Federalist #10 warned about. If judges had to run for office, wealthy and powerful groups could influence them and constitutional rights for minorities could easily be ignored. Appointment allows judges to make fair, long term decisions based on law, not popularity.

1. Patricia Williams says the “War on Terror” is a new kind of war because it’s not against a single country or army. Instead, it’s a fight against terrorism in general, which can happen anywhere. It’s different from traditional wars since there’s no clear enemy or end, it mixes military actions with regular law enforcement.
2. The “Roving Wiretaps” part of the Patriot Act seems to go against the Fourth Amendment, which protects privacy and stops unreasonable searches. It lets the government watch someone’s phones or emails without saying exactly which devices or places they’ll monitor, which feels like too much power and not enough oversight.
3. “Sneak and peek” warrants also raise Fourth Amendment concerns because they let law enforcement secretly enter and search someone’s home without telling them right away. Even though it’s meant for terrorism cases, it still violates the idea that people should know when their property is being searched.

1. The Establishment Clause and the Lemon Test
   • The Establishment clause is part of the First Amendment and it basically means the government can’t create or support a specific religion. It keeps church and state separate so everyone can have their own beliefs. The Lemon Test came from a court case called Lemon v. Kurtzman (1971) and it helps decide if something the government does violates that rule. For a law or action to be okay, it has to have a non-religious purpose, it can’t help or hurt any religion and it can’t get the government too involved with religion.
2. Flag Burning and the First Amendment
   • Burning the American flag is protected by the First Amendment as a form of free speech. In Texas v, Johnson (1989), the Supreme Court said that even though a lot of people see flag burning as disrespectful, it’s stilled considered symbolic speech. The government can’t punish someone because it’s a form of expression or protest.
3. “I’m taking the Fifth”
   • When someone says “I’m taking the Fifth” they’re talking about their right under the Fifth Amendment to stay silent so they don’t incriminate themselves. It’s a protection that let’s people avoid self incrimination, which means they don’t have to answer questions or testify against themselves in court.

1. In a federal system like the U.S, citizens have a say at more than one level, they’re able to vote for local, state and national leaders. This gives people more power in how things are run. In a confederation, the states hold most of the power and the national government doesn’t have much control. Citizens mainly deal with their state governments. In a unitary system, the main authority is the national government, so most decisions come from the top and citizens mainly follow rules made by that one central power.
2. The division of power means splitting up government responsibilities so not one part becomes too powerful. In the U.S, power is divided between the federal and state governments and also among the three branches legislative, executive and judicial. Congress makes laws, the president enforces them and the court interpret them. This keeps everything balanced and makes sure one branch can’t control everything.
3. During the covid-19 pandemic, the federal government had a big impact on how New York responded. The government provided funding and guidelines through the CDC and emergency relief programs like the CARES Act. New York followed a lot of those national recommendations while adding it’s own rules, like mask mandates, curfews and school policies. The federal government also handled vaccine distribution and stimulus checks, which shaped how state and local governments managed public safety and supported people financially. It really showed how both levels of government depend on each other during a crisis.