citizenship and social class

Nandi Lewis

POL 166

Professor: Barry Murdaco 

Lehman college 

                                                Reflection Paper

                                    Citizenship and Social Class by T.H Marshall

" And civil rights were indispensable to a competitive market economy. They gave to each man, as part of his individual status, the power to engage as an independent unit in the economic struggle and made it possible to deny to him social protection on the ground that he was equipped with the means to protect himself."

           In the quote above, Marshall explains the meaning of civil rights as being initially individualistic as a means of gain. Civil rights was necessary because it allowed inequality and also gave a legal passage way for people especially upper class to attain things that they wanted with acknowledging that it was not promised of being possessed. Marshall emphasizes clearly that civil rights help the law and degrade social rights in a given society because of not wanting responsibility outside the employment contract. Here, it is obviously clear that civil rights was a driven quality of society in which people realized that voicing social rights was not enough to get everyone the freedom that he or she thought they deserved. In realizing this, because citizenship was better off in promoting ones self, upper class are free to stretch their limits in gaining more economic control over people of lower class, by abusing their civil rights. In protecting ones self, status has to be gained, and in doing so, each individual go head to head in battle of economic interest. Overall Marshall, shows that civil rights is nothing but an abusive tool in which creates categories to label people in a social status in order to keep interest of the one in power. 

       The reason why I chose this quote from Marshall's essay is because it seemed to further my understanding on civil rights. Although he mentions about citizenship being made of three parts, civil, political and social rights, it is clear in this reading that civil rights was oriented to confuse some and to reward those who wanted to gain more economic control. It seems to me that civil rights are instituted to justify the inequality of this country but not in an upfront manner. Many people to this day have individualistic attitudes no matter how we take it, for the most part I believe many Americans are conditioned that way. Within civil rights lies freedom and if I see another way out in escaping my entrapment or another way in order to gain more I will most likely with my freedom take that route. Freedom can be expressed in many ways I feel their is no limit, which allows the powerful to become more powerful. Civil rights gives them the right to further in creating inequalities. 

civil disobedience reflection paper

Nandi Lewis
POL 166
Professor: Barry Murdaco
Lehman College


                                  Reflection Paper
                                  Civil Disobedience by Henry Theory

"A common and natural result of an undue respect for law is, that you may see a file of soldiers, colonel, captain, corporal, privates, powder monkeys and all, marching in admirable order over hill and dale to the wars, against their wills, ay, against their common sense and consciences, which make it very steep marching indeed, and produces palpitation of the heart. They have no doubt that it is a damnable business in which they are inclined. Now, what are they men at all? Or small movable forts and magazines, at the service of some unscrupulous man in power?"

         In this quote by Thoreau, he emphasizes on how the government and the people working for the government do not honor the law it self but the business aspect of it. Thoreau expresses that the government main goal is to satisfy its self and not the people, who supposedly they are serving. He states by using soldiers, colonel, captain, corporal, privates, powdered monkeys, to describe the people serving the country as avoiding their conscience. They are serving the people not by their will or based of what is right and wrong but what is profitable for the men who run the government. By stating that they are peaceably inclined to what is happening; Thoreau shows that these men are aware and are also interested in a profitable gain. Consequently, the government profitable gains are maintained by ignoring their conscience, the people's conscience and training willing men who want to serve the country to annul their conscience.

         The reason I picked this part of the essay as a quote is because it highlights the main idea of the government serving its own interests. It is true that if the government was to consider what is right or wrong, they would struggle with fulfilling their goals. But why allow us to think that we are free in expressing anything in the first place? I do believe that freedom goes to a certain limit especially when one is able to exercise power over the things that an individual is in need of. After picking this particular part from the reading, I believe that many people do move like machines and robots in order to fulfill their needs, goals, and greed. The government continues its self greed behavior by promoting and encouraging others to get on board by which they introduce benefits to them. In conclusion, avoiding ones conscience creates social order to keep people in categories to maintain power.
            

Nandi Lewis

POL 166

Professor: Barry Murdaco

Lehman College

                              

                                                      Reflection Paper
                           Revisiting the Constitution:
                We Need Term Limits for Federal Judges
                                By James Greene

“Eighteen years would mean that justice’s tenure would be long enough to ensure independence from political patronage. As important, it would be short enough to ensure that we remain a country of laws and not of men.” (James Greene)

        In this article written by James Greene he expresses the concerns of power in the Supreme Court systems. This particular part in the article states the main concern of which judicial branch of the Constitution needs to be advised more often so that the same person in power of this branch does not feel lead to exercise power according to his beliefs because being there for a long period of time. He expresses how it is patronage in a sense to allow the same person to stabilize laws because he or she is able to affect decisions that need to be made hastily in order to implement the needs of society. The judge would be able to affect legislative and executive inputs on every change; and implement court orders in which to enhance a certain population in the country. Having someone in the Supreme Court seat for an ample amount of time does  allow U.S citizens to feel as if were are receiving the freedom that was promised to us. More importantly it is important that laws benefit the population’s best interest and not of those who are in control of meaningful decisions, decisions that are based upon for example racial stereotypes. In conclusion having certain amount of time for judges to work in Supreme Courts limits the over use of power.

In picking this article I found it interesting to learn that the Constitution allows for judges to sit for years doing this job. If the executive and legislative have to meet certain time requirements why is it that these judges are silently remaining in power for long periods? This book that I am reading for one of my classes called “The New Jim Crow” by Michelle Alexander, really informed me on things I did not know especially about the Supreme Court. She stated that the Supreme Court were allowing law enforcement to perform tactics by giving them consent to do unreasonable searches and seizures when it came to drugs without no suspicion. They also did not value the fourth amendment towards minorities in particular, and with the police they came up with ways to justify certain actions. I think what Green wrote as a step in making sure judges serve shorter times is a great idea because in any case certain rules would not affect people for long periods of time. Also it gives us in this country a chance to see who is true to serving the country rather than serving themselves. Overall, this article opened my understanding towards politics because it allowed me to see the constitution for what it truly is. 

Reflection paper 2

Nandi Lewis

Class: Politics 166

Professor: Barry Murdaco

Lehman College

                                           Reflection Paper

                      What I Saw In America

                        By G. K. Chesterton

   ‘A man is perfectly entitled to laugh at a thing because he happens to find it incomprehensible. What he has no right to do is to laugh at it as incomprehensible, and then criticize it as if he comprehended it. The very fact of its unfamiliarity and mystery ought to set him thinking about the deeper causes that make people so different from himself, and that without merely assuming that they must be inferior to himself”( Chesterton pg.5).

    In this specific passage by Chesterton I believe that he is highlighting the process of which one should be aware of national differences. Chesterton explains that there is nothing wrong with acknowledging one nation as different from one’s own. But to implement and define someone based on their differences and categorizing them in such a manner is false. He explains there is nothing wrong with laughing at something that seems odd; however it is best that amusement be used to find out why they are or why they go about things in such matter. In this example of Chesterton finding of the American nation, I concluded that differences are usually not understood to why they are different and that with those differences it allow people to set superiority and inferiority.

     The reason I have chosen this passage because it opened up my understanding to not be so judgmental. In the past I have found myself laughing at certain things  in life and viewing it in one way only to justify myself in what I was doing. It allow me to see that many concepts in America and to wonder if this country is really favors diversity, or is it used for free labor and oppression. Having an attitude something should not be is refusing how it became in existence which is truly what need to go further into our future. I believe this passage signifies how ignorant a person can be in disqualifying one’s self in knowledge in which is needed to create equality.

             

Response to Two Faces in Power

Nandi Lewis

Class: Politics 166

Professor: Barry Murdaco

Lehman College

       

                                                           Reflection Paper 

                                     Two Faces of Power 

                         By Peter Bachrach and Morton S. Baratz

   “Of course power is exercised when A participates in the making of decisions that affect B. But power is also exercised when A devotes his energies to creating or reinforcing social and political values and institutional practices that limit the scope of the political process to public consideration of only those issues which are comparatively innocuous to A. To the extent that A succeeds in doing this, B is prevented, for all practical purposes, from bringing to the fore any issues that might in their resolution be seriously detrimental to A’s set of preferences?”

     In this particular part of the passage it has revealed to me that power is exercised in many forms in which can be disguised in order to not be seen as powerful. Bachrach and Baratz emphasize on how decisions make up the majority effects of the political system. In this case, A participates knowingly work together with B, exercising ways in order to get what is fulfilling to their needs. The needs of which executes one way of thinking undermining B participants acknowledgements of political ideas. The political process is hindered and resolutions towards better outcomes are in the hand of one group because of the fear of losing the attention to its own appetite, therefore causing limitations to discussions. I believe that it goes in comparison with the elitist because they are usually very expressive and orderly based off of a structure of which they stratify. Participants of group B would be pluralist because they feel that one person does not run the community but it takes many. Overall this certain part of the passage has clearly stated how power in political views build and misuse each other in order to establish each own power.

    The reason I choose this particular part of the passage is because its example allowed me to understand more of how power is exercised in one groups perspective. I understand that I don’t have to say that I am in power, but it is what I do with it. Do I make decisions based off myself and people that share similar desires as me? Or do I go after what is best for the whole community? There seems to never be a right or wrong answer but the approach in the political world you take can possibly affect individuals having them to feel as if they aren’t being heard. In conclusion, it seems the way one examines and uses power ultimately keeps the cycle of individuals never being satisfied.