Gideon v. Wainwright (1963) 

Clarence Earl Gideon was a 51-year-old white male who had been in and out of prison much of
his life. He made a living by gambling and theft.

Gideon was serving a five-year sentence for the crime of breaking and entering with the intent to
commit a misdemeanor (petty larceny). He was convicted of breaking and entering into the Bay
Harbor Pool room in Panama City, Florida.

Gideon submitted a five-page writ of certiorari directed to the Supreme Court for the State of
Florida. Gideon felt his conviction violated the due process clause of the fourteenth amendment.
        “No state shall …deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.”

Why or how? Gideon asked for aid of counsel. To try a poor man for a felony without giving him
a lawyer was to deprive him of due process of law.

However, there was an earlier Supreme Court case known as Betts v. Brady, in which the
Supreme Court had rejected the idea due process clause of the fourteenth amendment provided
a flat guarantee of counsel in state criminal trials. The earlier decision of Betts v. Brady surprised
many people because Justice Owen J. Roberts said the 14th amendment provided no universal
assurance of lawyers help in state criminal cases.  Constitutionally required only if to be tried
without one amounted to “a denial of fundamental fairness”. Later cases refined the rule of Betts
v. Brady. For the poor man he had to prove he fell under special circumstances of the court.
Those could be illiteracy, mental illness, or ignorance and event to the complexity of he
charges.

In Gideon’s petition he showed no prior knowledge of this case. From the day Gideon was tried
he had the idea that a poor man was entitled to a lawyer.

June 1, 1962 the court granted Gideon’s writ of certiorari and to discuss if the court’s holding on
Betts v. Brady were reconsidered.

Abe Fortas was appointed as Gideon’s counsel. Fortas saw that Gideon had no special
circumstances that required him counsel under Betts v. Brady. But it was clear that Gideon would
have benefited from a lawyer. 

Fortas’ told the court that there was no indication that Gideon had low intelligence, or the judge
was unfair, but Gideon’s case shows the difficulty with Betts versus Brady. It shows that no man
however intelligent can conduct his own defense adequately.
A few days later Gideon v Wainwright was decided, the court concurred in the overruling of Betts
v Brady. All the states responded quickly to the decision, especially Florida. Shortly after the
decision Governor Farris Bryant called on the legislature to enact a public defendant.

The resolution of Gideon v Wainwright did not decide the fate of Gideon. He was now entitled to
new trial. Gideon was appointed a state attorney W. Fred Turner. After nearly two years in prison
Gideon was found not guilty. 

Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution: an individual cannot be compelled to incriminate himself

-in 1966, U.S. Supreme Court held that Ernesto Miranda’s constitutional rights were violated because he was not advised of his rights
-the rights of one accused of a crime have come to be known as the Miranda rights briefly stated as follows:

-prior to questioning, law enforcement officers/police must (1) warn a suspect that he has the right to remain silent, (2) that any statement he makes may be used as evidence 

against him, and (3) that he has the right to the presence of an attorney, and (4) that if the person cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for him prior to any questioning

     Chief Justice Earl Warren's 1966 majority opinion in landmark civil liberties case regarding rights of the accused during arrest. 
     Ernesto Miranda was arrested for kidnapping and rape and subsequently identified by the victim in a police lineup. 
     Miranda's interrigation lead to a signed confession which read that he had done so with "full knowledge of my legal rights, understanding that any statement I make may be used against me." 
     Miranda's confession was entered as evidence in court and used to gain a conviction despite the officer's testimony that Miranda had not been told of his rights to have an attorney present during interrogation. 
     The Arizona Supreme Court upheld the conviction on the grounds that Miranda had not specifically requested an attorney. 
     The United States Supreme Court overturned Miranda's conviction. 
     Chief Justice Warren based the Miranda ruling on Escobedo v. Illinois (1964). 
     Warren writes that "the prosecution may not use statements, whether exculpatory or inculpatory, stemming from custodial interrogation of the defendant unless it demonstrates the use of procedural safeguards effective to secure the privilege against self-incrimination." 
     Warren contends that, prior to interrogation, anyone taken into custody by law enforcement must be made fully aware of their right to remain silent, that any statement they make may be used as evidence against them, and that they have the right to the presence of an attorney, either retained or appointed. 
     Warren observes that an individual may request this attorney at any time during the questioning process, and that answering some questions does not deprive one the right to have an attorney present during further questioning. 
     The Constitutional issue in Miranda is the admissibility of statements obtained from a defendant questioned while in custody or otherwise deprived of his freedom of action in any significant way. 
     The problem in Miranda was the problem of secrecy, that the interrogation occurred while the defendant was being held incommunicado without the knowledge that he was rightfully due an attorney during said questioning. 
     Warren sights various police manuals as evidence that the goal of police officers during questioning is to gain a confession from the accused by way of psychological coersion which is most effective in private, and that without the presence of an attorney the accused is a victim of this privacy and secrecy. 
     This secrecy leads to gaps in knowledge of the facts of an interrogation. 
     Warren observes that the curcumstanes surrounding private interrogation of the accused by law enforcement are designed to intimidate the defendant, and that this is at odds with the right to freedom from self-incrimintaion. 
     Warren rules on the basis that procedural safeguards must be employed to protect the freedom from self-incrimination, and states that certain procedures must be followed 
     A defendant must be notified of his right to remain silent, that anything he says may be used against him in a court of law, that he has the right to the presence of an attorney, and that if he cannot afford an attorney one will be appointed for him prior to any questioning if he so desires.
     The defendant may waive these rights after due notification, but until he has done so after notification no statements he makes may be admitted as evidence in a trial. 

Top of Page

An analysis of the terrorist attacks of 9/11 reveals bureaucratic failures as well as the proposal of controversial legislation.

The dilemma: How much should government intrude into the lives of citizens in its quest to provide protection?

In 2003, an assessment stated “At home the counterterrorism effort suffered from the lack of an effective domestic intelligence capability.” (FBI/CIA)

Kettl suggests that “Americans and their officials wondered if the nation’s tradition of openness and minimal intrusion of government had allowed the hijackers an advantage that they had exploited to horrendous result.”

Congressional proposals included legislation to ease the government tracking of telephone calls as well as emails, also extended wiretapping capabilities and tracking funds to terrorist organizations. Kettl elaborates that the Bush administration wanted to extend these proposals with indefinite detaining of noncitizens suspected of planning terrorist acts, extended eavesdropping, and also make these capabilities permanent for the federal government.

Opposition to this hasty legislation was proposed by Senator Lehay and the American Civil Liberties Union on the basis of civil liberties, lack of habeas corpus, also detaining “enemy combatants” indefinitely without trial.

The USA Patriot Act was introduced. (Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act) Kettl notes that the acronym described the act, but “wrapped the legislation in the cloak of patriotism, which the drafters hoped no one could resist.”

Patriot Act’s expansion of powers:

-tracking and gathering of info with phonecalls and now email
-allowing “roving surveillance” not bound to one location/tool (includes voicemail/library books)
-investigating money laundering
-strengthening border agents power to detain/deport suspicious individuals
-declaring certain activities as federal crimes (attacks on transportation facilities, bio attacks, harboring of terrorists, money laundering for terrorism, etc)
-allowing “sneak and peek” searches (those searches done without informing, as not to tip off potential terrorist cells)
-allowing prosecution of computer hackers (with terrorists possibly hacking electronic files/businesses)

 Kettl concludes by stating that homeland security is a balance, between protection and safety in their workplaces and homes, as well as freedom and liberty in their daily lives.

- Since the September 11 terrorists’ attacks, security has been tightened. Because of this Civil Libertarians feel troubled. They feel that liberties such as the freedom of the press and restraint from unwarranted search and seizures (Article 4- Constitution) will be eroded by the security measures. 
- On the other side of the coin many people feel that they are not safe because of the terrorists and they are willing to have some of their liberties compromised in order to provide a safer America.
- Posner says that these values do not have to be looked at in a white and black issue, but rather that they should be seen as fluid. Posner says that public-safety interest and liberty interest neither have priority in his view. He believes that the safer a nation feels the more judges (because for the most part judges determine our rights and liberties through judicial interpretation) will be lenient towards liberty and if the nation is threatened more liberties will be repressed in order for protection.
- A dissent issued by Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson states in a manner that the Bill of Rights should not be made into a “suicide pact”. He believed that the Bill of Rights should be more interpreted by judicial interpretation which would allow the Bill of Rights to be alterable in response to national security.
- Posner states that our civil liberties should be curtailed after the threat of international terrorism “to the extent that the benefits in greater security outweigh the costs in reduced liberty.
- Many liberties have been affected in previous times of national emergencies. Such as Abraham Lincoln’s writ of habeas corpus during the American Civil War, also interning the Japanese during World War II, and most recently the Patriot Act. Posner asks that; is it not best that America err on the side of caution.
Americans view security and civil liberties as an either/or situation.  Posner asks Americans to see the importance of both values.
Top of Page

Brown vs Board of Education - December 13, 1952 

     By the 1952 Term, the Court was failing to reach a unanimous decision 81% of the time 
          It was the most severely fractured court in history (mainly due to Fred Vinson's failure
          as Chief Justice) 
          The divided court has dealt with other racial cases by chipping away at Jim Crow
          laws and ignoring Plessy vs Ferguson's validity
               With Brown they could not ignore Plessy any longer 
               It was the South with which the Justices had primarily to deal in confronting
               Brown 
          The civil rights of blacks and criminal defendants were prone to be mixed together in
          the public, all these factors were a target for the "red tar" of anti Americanism 
          The Supreme Court but a stop to the Brown discussions as the year ended (Vinson
          swore in Eisenhower) 
               The Justices were not close to a decision and they knew that a close vote
               would be disastrous for the court and the country 
               Fred Vinson was increasingly disagreeable, he was upset over the Court's
               inability to find a strong, unified position on Brown 
               Fred Vinson died of a heart attack on September 8, 1953 
                    Some felt he was the obstacle to the courts problem of reaching a
                    defensible settlement of the monumental segregation cases 
          Eisenhower appointed Earl Warren as Chief Justice 
               Warren thought it was a simple case 
                    He looked at previous decisions and said that they kept "chipping
                    away" at Plessy rather than facing it head-on 
                    He felt there was only one way the case could be decided, but the
                    question was how it was to be reached 
               Warren declared that the Court's policy of delay (favored by Vinson) could no
               longer be permitted 
               Warren believed that the idea of separate but equal rested on the idea of the
               inferiority of the African American race 
                    He stated that the law could not set the races apart and doing so went
                    against the intentions of the three Civil War amendments 
               Warren wanted to unite the court on the Brown decision 
                   He felt that a lot of precedents would be broken when they overturned
                    Plessy, but he felt it was a necessity 
                    He recognized that the Court's decision would have wide spread
                    repercussions, varying in intensity from state to state 
               Warren decision was approved at the May 15 conference 
               The decision was announced on May 17, 1954 
                    "Does segregation of children in public schools solely on the
                    basis......deprive the children of minority group of equal education
                    opportunities.? 
                    "We believe that it does.".... 
                    "We conclude.... unanimously," - "that in the field of public education
                    the doctrine of 'separate but equal' has no place.  Separate
                    educational facilities are inherently unequal" 
               The Court wanted full assistance of the parties in formulating decrees, so they
               scheduled further argument for the term beginning the following fall 
                    Attorney Generals and all states requiring or permitting segregation
                    were invited to participate 
          Warren managed, in delivering the decision, thus managed to: 
               Proclaim "the wide applicability" of the decision and make it plain that the
               Court had no intention of limiting its benefits to a handful of plaintiffs in a few
               outlying districts 
               Reassured the South that the Court understood the toll desegregation would
               cause and granted them some time ot get use to the idea 
               Invited the South to get involved in the entombing of Jim Crow by joining the
               Court 
          It was 1:20 pm, the wire services proclaimed the news to the nation 
               School children could no longer be segregated by race 
               Law no longer recognized a separate equality 
               No American was more equal than any other American 

“Black rage” is a term that many Americans identify with such groups and acts such as the Black Panthers of 1960s or the 1992 Los Angeles riots.  According to Ellis Cose, black rage can be applied to the feelings of many successful upper-middle-class African Americans today.  Unfortunately, black professionals are faced with many difficulties in their careers.

Cose uses the successful journalist, Joel Dreyfuss, as an example.  Although Dreyfuss received an elite education and exemplified the qualities of an intelligent and determined young man, he encountered discrimination and obstacles throughout his life.

Cose believed that even if racial peace were maintained, stereotypes would still be present.  These stereotypes not only encourage whites to treat blacks as inferiors but also encourage blacks to see themselves as many whites would have them be.  This stereotype can be so powerful that African Americans that choose not to personify it are often accused by other blacks of trying not to be black.

John Ogbu, an anthropologist at the University of California, Berkeley, compared recent immigrants to African Americans.  He said that immigrants come to the United States with the expectation of certain economic, political, and social benefits.  While waiting for these benefits, immigrants measure their success by the standards of their homeland.  Even when they were restricted to manual labor, they saw their situation as only temporary.  Ogbu said that in contrast, black parents encourage their children to do well in school so they can be successful in life while unconsciously passing on a more demoralizing message.

Unfortunately, few people of any race have the strength, desire, imagination, or appetite to abandon ideas they have been taught all their lives.  Thus, Americans of all races continue to see each other through a prism of distorting colors, and to struggle with the problem of prejudice.

Joe Feagin, a University of Florida sociologist, points out that discrimination of today does not resemble discrimination that took place decades ago. 

Derrick Bell, a civil rights activist and legal scholar, believes that America’s brand of racism is permanent.

Ex-Attorney General, Robert Kennedy, once said that it was conceivable that there might be a black president in forty years.  In an address published in the New York Times Magazine in 1965, James Baldwin said, “From the point of view of the man in the Harlem barber shop, Bobby Kennedy only got here yesterday and now he is already on his way to the Presidency.  We were here for four hundred years and now he tells us that maybe in forty years, if you are good, we may let you become President.”  Many African Americans responded, “We are tired of waiting.”
 

Top of Page

-Normally intelligent whites can become "irrational" and "would violate their own rules" when faced
with issues involving race.
-In 60s and 70s when race was a major story, it allowed black journalist to thrive.
-Now best reporting jobs are given to whites because of changing nature of news.
-Stereotypes are still destructive to blacks.
-Many black parents discuss the problems with the "system" in front of their kids. 
-This tells them not to try because they won't be able to succeed anyway.
-Bell believes whites will never recognize blacks as equals.

-Some believe affirmative action is reverse discrimination.
-Affirmative action proponents and opponents rest their argument on one of liberalism's central
principals, namely its version of distributive justice: idea that preferred jobs and rewards ought to
be distributed according to talents and qualifications in a social context characterized by equality
of opportunity.
    -Equal opportunity or Merit principle
-Some argue the principle doesn't do enough to protect individuals.
-Some left liberals believe this principle is excessively individualistic and erodes the basis for
social solidarity and cooperation.
-Some say affirmative action means equal opportunity, others emphasize that affirmative action is
a remedial process that temporarily gives preference to women and nonwhite men in an attempt
to increase their numbers in the work force.
-Some also argue that affirmative action is true to equal opportunity by asserting that it is needed
for women and nonwhite men to "get their foot in the door", or to be given a "fair chance" or "equal
consideration" for jobs and promotions.
-Several women asserted that white men still controlled the department and that without the
pressure from affirmative action, these men wouldn't give up their monopoly of power.
-Another argument says that affirmative action integrates the work force and thereby provides
better public service.

Top of Page
 
 

An analytical history of the gay and lesbian movements in the U.S.

-debunking the myth: there is no unified gay and lesbian movement in the U.S.

-scope of gay and lesbian movement is wide and diverse

-gay marriages

-gays in the military

Ellen Alderman and Caroline Kennedy present the story behind an "obscure federal case involving the First Amendment and freedom of religion." 

The case involved a road that the U.S. Forest Service had decided to build through public lands considered to be secret b the Yuroke Tribe in northern California. 

The tribe felt that if the road was built it would destroy the sanctity of the "high country" forever. 

The Indians used the free exercise clause which forbids the government from outlawing religious beliefs as their guide to fight the building of the road in court. 

In 1983 the Federal District Court for the Northern District of California voted that the building of the road would violate the Northwest Indian's right to freely exercise their religion. 

The government continued to appeal the decision without success until it reached the Supreme Court in November of 1987. 

The Indians based their Supreme Court arguments on their victories in the lower courts and on a 1972 Supreme Court case, Wisconsin v. Yoder. 

The Indians lost by one vote. 

The Supreme Court concluded that "unless the government coerces individuals to act in a manner that violates their religious beliefs, the free exercise clause is not implicated, and the government does not have to provide a compelling reason for actions. 

Tiger O'Rourke, an Indian who helped fight the cause, stated that, "We have to understand the Constitution now.  We still need our line of warriors, but now they've got to be legal warriors.  That's our war now, and it's the only way we're going to survive." 

Although the Supreme Court acted in favor of the government, the 101st Congress passed legislation adding the G-O Road corridor to the Siskiyou Wilderness. 

This legislation ensures that the logging road will not be completed. 

However, the area was protected to preserve the environment rather than the Indians' religion.

"A way of life that is odd or even erratic but interferes with no rights or interests of others is not to be condemned because it is different." - Chief Justice Warren Burger - 

First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution provides that Congress shall make no laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion

-for ages Indian tribes in Northern California have performed sacred religious ceremonies

-when the U.S. Forrest Service announced plans to build a logging road through the heart of the high country, the Indians went to court, claiming that the logging road would violate their First Amendment right to freely exercise their religion

-the Indians lost their case in the U.S. Supreme Court by one vote with Justice Brennan writing an emotional dissent

-however, the 101^st Congress passed legislation ensuring the logging road will not be completed based on environmental reasons rather than the Indian’s religion. Thus the Indians’ victory was bitter sweet

An all white jury convicted Charles Freeman, an owner of a record store selling 2 Live Crew records

A mixed jury acquitted all three members of 2 Live Crew
 -Their lyrics were seen an expressive art
  -Freedom of speech protected by First Amendment
   -Use of expert witnesses to reinforce the lack of danger in 
     lyrics

The opposition to 2 Live Crew uses statistics that the rap groups audience is young, to propose that the obscene lyrics are likely to create the wrong impressions upon such a young audience

First Amendment also protects freedom of speech

-in 1957 for the first time, the U.S. Supreme Court spoke to the question of whether literature dealing with sex was meant to be protected by the First Amendment

--the Supreme Court defined "obscenity" subjectively at that time

--in 1964, the Supreme Court redefined obscenity using a more objective approach

--in 1973, the Supreme Court redefined obscenity again to make it more palatable to conservative opinion

-in Miami, in June 1990, Luther Campbell, the leader of rap groups 2 Live Crew was arrested for singing and playing "obscene" songs; at about the same time a record store owner in Ft. Lauderdale was arrested and convicted for selling a recording of the same music

-for 25 years, the First Amendment has barred this type of censorship but people have varied opinions on whether this music group was spreading dangerous filth about women

-rap music is like other forms of artistic expression; restraints ought to be limited to persons who use music to incite others to crime, violence, etc

-dissemination of this type music to children raise different questions

-Legitimate, deeply-rooted rights have given way to what are nothing more than demands.
-In 1988 election, only 1/2 of eligible voters voted.
-Americans vote less than citizens of other liberal democracies.  They also display a remarkable
degree of apathy concerning public affairs.
-In the home of free speech, genuine exchange of ideas about matters of high public importance
has come to a virtual standstill.
-A near-aphasia concerning responsibilities make it seem legitimate to accept the benefits of
living in a democratic social welfare republic without assuming the corresponding personal and
civic obligations.
-As various new rights are proclaimed or proposed, the catalog of individual liberties expands
without much consideration of the ends to which they are oriented, their relationship to one
another, to corresponding responsibilities, or to the general welfare.
-We need the renewal of our strong rights tradition, not the abandonment.

-Glendon is in favor of individual rights but yet she wants people to be more realistic and less artificial when it comes to their  definition of rights.

-Voting, for example, is a right but yet Americans tend to do it less than all other citizens of liberal democracies.

-Poor voter turnout is a problem especially because people complain so much about their rights but yet they won't go out and  do anything about it.

-Conflict about rights has become something  very common that we discuss in a public setting to talk about the issues of right or  wrong.

-To keep adding on to rights is eventually going to cause a collision as far as "well this right says I can do it but on the other hand  this law says I can't do it".

-Simplistic rights talk reflects and distorts American culture.

-What is needed is not the abandonment but the renewal of our strong rights tradition.

-Must find a way to remedy the poverty which afflicts us in public services and which is in such increasingly bizarre contrast with our affluence in private goods.
-Necessary to temper and, more hopefully, to eliminate the social disorders which are the counterpart of the present imbalance.
-To create the demand for new automobiles, we must contrive elaborate and functionless changes each year and then subject the consumer to ruthless psychological pressures to persuade him of their importance.
-We get growth and increased employment along the dimension of private goods only at the price of
increasingly frantic persuasion.
-School, roads, police, public housing, etc, must provide a just cause for the need of money.
-Only hope is to separate the issue of equality from that of social balance.
-The rational liberal, in the future, will resist tax reduction, even that which ostensibly favors the poor, if it is at the price of social balance.
-No test exists to see if balance has been met with private and public needs.
Top of Page

The United States ideology is from: the Wealth of Nations and the Declaration of Independence. 

The Wealth of Nations is an overview of how the market system can benefit the greater society, as an “individual intends to his own gain” is “led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention.” 

As the Wealth of Nations was an economic ideology, the Declaration of Independence was a political one. It lays the foundation of the United States based on the fact that each person can pursue their own values—with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. 

Friedman argues that “Economic freedom is an essential prerequisite for political freedom.” Yet, a combination of economic & political power is dangerous.

Friedman continues to state that the growth of big govt or central govt limits freedom, and there is a noted growth in the United States government. The big government would eliminate the growth of the free-market and freedoms of the Declaration.

The question is how can we save economic freedom from big government? Friedman details the concentration of power in DC with thousands of employees, lobbyists, etc. He also details about the huge bureaucratic system, and its powers of red-tape. 

Friedman proposes a solution to the growth of big government and the limits of economic freedom with: An Economic Bill of Rights: This limits the funds that federal and state legislators can appropriate. By implementing this, the legislators would remain in balance with the programs which they want to support.

Friedman concludes by stating that “human and economic freedom are part of the very fabric of our being…” and the “greatest threat to human freedom is the concentration of power…” yet we are still free to choose for a change of direction.

*Economic freedom is necessary to ensure Political freedom
    - if you combine economic and political power together in one person/ institution, tyranny is imminent

-strong / big gov't poses danger to freedom (out weighs the "good" big gov't can do)
- our gov't has become to strong (local--Fed.)
        even with good reasons for expansion this is dangerous
- if the gov't keeps expanding we will possibly loose prosperity and our freedom
- we can still save America if we stop the growth of big central gov't
- mentions how powerful Washington is and lobbyists, interest groups....

    there is an "invisible hand in politics"  BUT people who promote the general interest are guided by the "invisible hand" to promote special interests inadvertently
- we have a gov't run largely by bureaucrats that are not looking out for the general interest
- they have ways of affecting policies by slowing things down, speeding them up, or interpreting policies in different ways

Proposal:
    -we can limit what gov't may do
    - Economic Bill of Rights
            -limit the total amount of $ the legislators (st. or fed.) may appropriate
            - with this limited budget the legislators would have to cut something in order to add something new which would keep them "in check" and accountable for the causes and policies which they support
 
 

     As workers became more abundant, the value of their labor diminished 
     Social Security and Medicare have come under attack 
     These programs were once thought "cherished" in our society 

Part II 
     For those people that earn a living through straight income, only the top 5%
     showed an increase in earnings between 1989 and 1994
     The reason for this wealth inequality is the stock market, with the elite being
     the class of large stockholders and bondholders 
     Because of this consumer debt soared as workers began relying on the stock
     market as an extra source of income while grossly overspending their "real"
     income 

Part III 
     American workers are relying on private sector money managers to keep
     them afloat financially and plan for retirement through investing, while
     spending all they have at this moment 
     This is caused by the fact that there is no longer an emphasis on long-term
     careers with one company and ongoing benefits 
     For the stock market to grow and prices to rise to meet this demand from the
     American worker, the amount being put into the market would have to
     increase by ten times over the next six years 

Discussion Questions 
     Where is this money going to come from if workers continue to go into
     personal debt from overspending and dependence on the market? 
     What can be done to spread the money out some how so that the rich aren't
     the only ones who get richer?
 

Top of Page

 Since the founding of our country, the American economy has depended on the work ethic, or so we think……

 William Wolman and Anne Colamosca, our two economist in the selection, believe the value of labor has increased as the value of capital has increased. The only real winners here are those who can produce enough money to invest. 

 -As the workforce increases the value of their labor decreases. The market and public policy have turned against work. In order to pay back some of the debt the government began scaling back programs such as social security, and welfare. 

 -The top one percent of stock and bond holders own 49% percent of stocks. The share held by the bottom 90 was under 14 % . Post cold war the net worth of the top one percent increased by 28.3% while the net worth of the population as a whole declined. As Americans watched the stock market soar, many put their wages on it hoping they Dow would soon bring results, that was not the case for many. As a result consumer debt rapidly increased. Those who earned their living from work greatly outspent their incomes. 

- The people who had earned their living from work have a right to be proud for they have carried on through wage stagnation and an economic system that has produced by far the richest in the "wealthy folk" class. The other 99% of the people had to work longer hours just to maintain their accustomed standard of living.

Economic insecurity continued to plague society although America’s economy as a whole was being "celebrated." In an attempt to reduce the federal deficit, congress decided to cut back social security which would, in the long run, affect those who work while the rich remained untouched. This is because their retirement benefits are only trivially dependant on social -security. 

- Due to the lack of stability found in the work force many resort to changing jobs quite a few times and this leaves Americans lacking the benefits of a company. So many are turning to financial investors or "new millinium moms" in hopes that they will someday turn their petty cash into millions.

-There is one bit of promising information though…there has been a decline in the unemployment rates. And then they proceed with "workers should realize that the primary reason that unemployment rates have fallen is because U.S. labor has become cheap and is being widely substituted for capital.

-Explored the situation of people who were poor w/in a society of plenty. 
-His characterization of the poor as "socially invisible" and "politically invisible" led to wide
public recognition of the problems of poverty in Amer.

-In 1950s this Amer. Worried about itself, yet even its anxieties were products of abundance. 
-Began to call itself "the affluent society" 
-Nations problem no longer matter of basic human needs. Now they were seen as qualitative,
a question of learning to live decently among the luxury.

-At same time, 40M- 50M citizens were poor and still are. 
-Amer. Poor are pessimistic and defeated and they are victimized by mental suffering to a
degree unknown in Suburbia. 
-Millions who are poor tend to become increasingly invisible. 
-American city has been transformed. 
        -Poor still inhabit the miserable housing in the central area, but are increasingly isolated
from contact w/or sight of anybody else

-The Development of the Amer. City has removed poverty from the living. 
        -well-meaning ignorance 
-Poor politically have no face and no voice. 
-Slums no longer visible to the middle class, so need for help is gone. 
-Today's poor missed the political and social gains of the 30s. 
        -First poor not to be seen. 
-Any attempt to abolish poverty in the U.S. must seek to destroy the pessimism and fatalism
that flourish in the other Amer.

        -This can be done by offering real opportunities to those people by changing the social
reality that gives rise to their sense of hopelessness.

-The spirit of a campaign against poverty does not cost a single cent. It is a matter of vision. 
-Poverty forms a culture, and interdependent sys. 
-Campaign against the misery of the poor should be comprehensive. 
-Fed. Gov't only institution in society capable of acting to abolish poverty. 
Top of Page

  Because of the unique history of blacks, it follows the civil rights vision that blacks
should be suffering more than any other ethnic group America 

     Blacks do not have the lowest incomes, educational levels or the most broken
     homes among all ethnic groups 

  The act of comparing blacks with the national average hides the fact that other
ethnic groups share the same and sometimes worse social conditions
  The historical uniqueness of blacks has not cause the contemporary uniqueness in
incomes, occupations, unemployment or welfare dependency, but blacks can differ
from the made up national average in the areas 

     These cause problems for blacks, but what is the cause? 

          If this was because of the unique history or genetics blacks
          would be different not just the national average but from every
          other ethnic group that share neither that history nor those
          genetics 

  Blacks and whites have different cultures that affect how they live, but at the same
time there is an abundance of sets of blacks who have a home life and family pattern
very similar to that of most whites. 

     Color may be the big factor in economic position, it will make little difference in
     the incomes of the sets of blacks such as this 

  In 1969, a Harvard study was done that compared blacks and whites whose homes
had similar characteristic and who had gone on to do the same number of years in
school. 

     There was no difference in the average income of the whites compared
     to the incomes the blacks 

  Husband wife families are more prevalent among whites than among blacks,
though it is declining, over time, among both groups 

     Because family structure reflects cultural values in general, blacks whose
     family structure reflects more of the norm of behavior should be more
     fortunate in the job market as well 

  For more than a decade, young black husband wife families outside the South have
had incomes identical to those of young white husband wife families outside the
South. 

     Today, when husbands and wives are both college educated and both
     working, black families of this description earn slightly more than white
     families of this description; this is nation wide and without regard to age 

  The average in come of blacks as a group remains far behind the average income
of whites as a group 

     What is not known is if the extent to which this is cause is due to cultural
     differences rather than color differences that bring forth racism and
     discrimination 

  Black politicians and civil rights organization would want to claim the credit for the
economic improvements that black people have experienced. 

     The fact is that blacks were achieving higher levels of education, skills
     and broader cultural exposure. 

          The advancement was not just because whites were letting
          down barriers 

  In the decade preceding the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the number of blacks in
professional, technical,  and other high level occupations more than doubled. 

     This was mainly because of the economic and legal advances taking
     place in the black community and beginning to make themselves known
     in the white consciousness 

  The reason there is embarrassment when discussing positive achievements by
blacks on the part of black leaders is because many of these achievements occurred
in ways that completely undermine the civil rights vision. 
  The civil rights vision continues pushing an approach which had proved
counterproductive for many disadvantages blacks, but yet beneficial to those already
advantaged, and it accumulates resentment against all blacks. 

-Blacks were widely believed to be genetically inferior in intelligence. 
-Blacks suffer more today than other groups from low income, broken homes, and the whole
litany of social pathology. 
-Not true though. Blacks do not have the lowest income, the lowest educational level or the
most broken homes among American Ethnic groups.

-Blacks and whites have diff. cultures that affect how they live and individually and collectively.

-Husband-wife families are more prevalent among whites than among blacks, though
decreasing over time among both groups.

-For more than decade, young black hus-wife families outside the South have had incomes
almost identical to those of young white hus-wife families outside the South.

-Still avg income of blacks as a group remains far behind the avg income of whites as a
group. 
-The advancement of blacks is not only b/c whites let their barriers down. 
-Few people today are aware that the ghettos in many cities were far safer places two
generations ago than they are today, both for whites and blacks.
Top of Page

-blacks and the entire society have made genuine progress

-still a large part of the black population remains in poverty

-what makes up the black poor

-the causes of urban blacks poverty

-conditions have festered too long and raise questions about the character and role of values in the black community

-black leadership must reinforce the black value heritage

-government action is necessary in addressing both the new and the lingering social and economic needs of the black community…disparities between blacks and whites can be eradicated only if the government assumes its appropriate role in a democratic, humane, and stable society

Funiciello, a former AFDC recipient writes about the hardships of attaining welfare for the needy. Theresa pleads for us to consider the struggle of women and the children who obtain welfare. She exposes the vast sum of money spent on the “poverty industries.” She explains that too little of the money gets to the poor and too much goes into the pocket of those claiming to help the poor.

In 1973, Theresa had her first experience with AFDC (welfare) when she was nursing a child and the father had left. She said that welfare was humiliating on a personal level, and administratively it was nuts.

In 1975 Theresa moved to New York City looking for a job, but could not find one. Here she encountered welfare for the second time. Looking for advice she went to the DWAC (Downtown Welfare Advocate Center). The women there thought something could be done about welfare and they set out to do so. The DWAC helped people negotiate the chaotic welfare system and the way welfare mothers feel about themselves in relation to welfare.
By 1976 she was organizing to change the way people thought about welfare. This was essential to changing the system from top to bottom.
In 1983 she was given a job with the DSS (Department of Social Services). She found that taxpayers were being cheated and the poor people were sacrificed as hundreds of millions of dollars are poured into sinkholes of the social welfare establishment. Nation wide, poverty is a big business as long as you are politically connected. 
Over a period of two decades, she has been on both ends of the spectrum of welfare. After all her experience she is still appalled. 
Top of Page

Barber’s definitions relative to the reading:

 Jihad- a religious struggle which can result in violence through the political and militaristic means of the crusade. The term, while many times associated with Islam is used in the context of any heartfelt struggle. Eg. Montana militia, Nazis, even Christians

 McWorld- the rapid economic and cultural expansion throughout the world of popular culture and goods. McDonalds is international and can be found within any and every culture. It is representative of the global encompassment of American culture, popular culture.

Jihad and McWorld balance each other out. They are two opposite forces which continuously struggle against each other, and neither one of them will ever truly die out. There will always be a cause for Jihad, a new effort for radicals to be involved in, and at the same time, society is continuously changing. Even those who fight against change embrace it in their actions.

 Bosnian assassins wear new Adidas apparel, Middle Eastern zealots watch satellite network television, and radical organizations listen to and play rock music in an effort to release their message.

 McWorld is the theory of globalization, and Jihad is anti-globalization. Together they balance each other out. 

What do Jihad and McWorld have in common?

 Both are negative
  Jihad focuses on destroying nationalism and sovereignty through isolating communities, while McWorld hurts national interests by the forging of global markets which hinder the sovereignty of nations. McWorld’s most powerful negative factor is the greed which is the focus of McWorld globalization.

Huntington describes the renewal of religion, especially the conflict between Islam and Christianity, as the primary factor in the shift of power to non-Western civilizations.

• The ideas of modernism, reason, progress, and prosperity continue to define American values.

• People are now emphasizing ancestry, religion, language, history, values, customs, and institutions.

•  The clash of civilizations has replaced the old rivalry of the superpowers.

(1) Some attempt to emulate the West and to join or to “bandwagon” with the West.
(2) Other societies attempt to expand their own economic and military power to resist and to “balance” against the West.

• Trade may or may not follow the flag, but culture almost always follows power.

As Western power declines, the ability of the West to impose Western concepts of human rights, liberalism, and democracy on other civilizations also declines and so does the attractiveness of those values to other civilizations.

East Asia, for example, attributes their own dramatic economic development not to their import of Western culture but rather to their adherence to their own culture.

Ronald Dore terms the rise of the much larger second generation in non-Western civilizations as the “second-generation indigenization phenomenon.”

•  Most of this second generation, in contrast to the first generation of foreign-educated teenagers, gets its education at home in universities created by the first generation, and the local rather than the colonial language is increasingly used for instruction.

•  This religious resurgence involved people returning to, reinvigoration, and giving new meaning to the traditional religions of their communities.
•  In society after society, this renewal manifests itself in the daily lives and work of people and the concerns and projects of government.

•  People need new sources of identity, new forms of stable community, and new sets of moral precepts to provide them with a sense of meaning and purpose.

More broadly, the religious resurgence throughout the world is a reaction against secularism, moral relativism, and self-indulgence, and a reaffirmation of the values of order, discipline, work, mutual help, and human solidarity.

•  Religious groups meet social needs left untended by state bureaucracies, such as medical assistance.

In conclusion, the futures of both peace and Civilization depend upon understanding and cooperation among the political, spiritual, and intellectual leaders of the world’s major civilizations.

-Around 1500 A.D. global politics were a multipolar system, meaning nations interacted, competed, and fought wars with each other.  Decisions by one civilization affected every other.  During the cold war politics became bipolar, in that the world was divided into three parts, with a group of democratic societies clashing and competing with nations associated with and led by the Soviet Union

-Post Cold-war the most important distinctions between people are cultural, not ideological, political, or economic.  We know who we are often after we only know who we are not or who we are against.  The world post cold war is made up of seven or eight major civilizations

-East Asian economic success has its source in East Asian culture, as do the difficulties East Asian societies have had in achieving stable democratic political systems.  Islamic culture explains in large part the failure of democracy to emerge in much of the Muslim world.

-Huntington states the West is and will remain for years to come the most powerful civilization, yet its power relative to other civilizations is declining.  Modernization is generating the revival of non-Western societies throughout the world

-“hard power”, power to command resting on economic and military strength, “soft power”, ability of a state to get “other countries to want what it wants” through appeal of culture and ideology.  Culture and ideology become attractive when they are seen as rooted in material success.  Nations will be swayed to follow the path of a successful nation in order to be successful themselves

-Communist ideology appealed to people worldwide when it was associated with economic success in the 50’s and 60’s, but that appeal evaporated when the Soviet Union stagnated and was unable to maintain military strength.

-For several centuries non-Western peoples envied the economic prosperity, technological sophistication and military power of Western societies, now though many East Asian societies attribute their dramatic economic development not to their import of Western culture but instead their adherence to their own culture. In other words, they are successful because they are not like the western world

Top of Page

• In February 1998, an American Marine Corps EA-6B Prowler was traveling at 621 miles per hour, at a height of 360 ft, when it crashed into a gondola killing twenty people. The Northern Italians were outraged, and thought President Clinton promised financial compensation, it was shot down in Congress.
• The term “blowback” was first used in the CIA. It refers to the unintended consequences of policies kept secret from the America people. Simply put blowback is a way of saying “a nation reaps what it sows”
• In 1980, in Nicaragua the U.S. trained Contras, military insurgents to revolt against the socialist-Sandinista government, then turned a blind eye when those same Contras made deals to sell cocaine in the United States for guns and supplies.
• Blowback can lead to more blowback in the form of retaliation.
• Because of the wealth and power of the United States there is expectantly more blowback to come.
• Johnson makes a point to say that if we do not take steps to solve our problems with more caution and regard, blowback will only become more intense. 

Reordering the world after the Cold War

-three myths:

• --that the old bipolar world would beget a multipolar world with power dispersed to new centers
• --that the domestic American consensus for an international foreign policy would substantially be restored
• --that the threat of war would be dramatically diminished

• --now is the unipolar movement…the U.S. is the single superpower
• --America can economically support its unipolar status but will Americans support such status or return to isolationism?
• --the most crucial element in the post Cold War world is the emergence of a new strategic environment marked by the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction

Top of Page

        Foreign policy has usually been considered the special province of high-level experts and
statesmen. Average citizens may have opinions and even input into domestic issues, but when
it comes to foreign policy, only people at the highest levels, with the greatest training and
knowledge, can make legitimate decisions.

With many examples from the past and present in American diplomacy, Alterman makes a
strong case for a foreign policy process that is more inclusive of average citizens' views.

•       In the winter of 1998, the Clinton administration was preparing to launch an attack on Iraq in
retaliation for Saddam Hussein’s unwillingness to comply with the United Nations inspection
regime. Support for the plan, however, appeared lukewarm in the extreme. At home, the plan
seemed to raise more questions than answers among the American people.
                -The public’s values are a good deal closer to the liberal republican values of the
country’s original founders than are those of the establishment that professes to represent them.
The problem is not that the public does not care. Rather, it has no idea how to force the
government to respond to its preferences.
•       To the degree that the makers of US foreign policy recognize a role for the public in policy
formation at all, it is usually that of the quietly attentive student. 
                -The responsibility of the president, for instance, according to former national security
advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, is not to act in accordance with the wishes of his voters but to
“enlighten the public about global complexities and generate support for his policies.”
•       In a 1989 poll, designed explicitly to discover the “values” that underlay Americans’ foreign
policy attitudes, nearly 90 percent of those questioned insisted that “America has a moral
responsibility to concentrate on domestic policy before concentrating on foreign policy.”
                -This belief is not he result of ignorance, insufficient education, stupidity, or an inability
of the foreign policy establishment to reach the larger public. This is a core American value.
•       Historically, the elite’s method of dealing with popular disapproval of foreign policy has
been simply to ignore it and to cover up evidence of unpopular policies whenever necessary.
                - Presidents now routinely defy the clearly stated values of the American people and
then lie about it. In doing so, they undermine the democratic foundation of our political system.
Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger were guilty of this transgression when they secretly
expanded the Vietnam war into Cambodia and then covered up the evidence. Ronald Reagan
and Oliver North were equally culpable when they sold missiles to the Ayatollah and used the
profits to funnel guns to the Nicaraguan contras

Conclusion: The idea, once again, is to identify the enduring collective values of the American
people and then to translate these into workable and consistent political policies.
 

Top of Page

     He feel that we should redesign the "great pattern" of America's interaction with
     the rest of the world. 

     Kennan states that in order to design or conduct the foreign policy of a great
     country, one must be clear as to the interests of that policy and what it is supposed
     to carry out. 

     George Kennan states that there are two sets of interest for those who conduct
     foreign policy: 
     1) there are the parochial interests of the country itself 
     2) there are the interests that engage this country as a participant in the affairs of
     the international community as a whole. 

     The management of our society is an "unavoidable responsibility." 

     In order to have success with foreign policy, America must first be able to cope
     with problems from within its own borders. 

     Kennan does not feel that America should play the role of teachers and redeemers
     to the rest of humanity. 

     If America is going to change foreign policy it will have to create comprehensive
     programs of reform in several areas of our lives.

     He then talks about past policy. 

     In recent decades, the power to make foreign policy decisions had been scattered.

     This has caused the power to take the necessary decisions to become fragmented.

     Kennan's goal is to inspire America to take action and change its ways. 

Top of Page

The passing of the Cold War presents a demand for nothing less than a redesigning of the entire great pattern of America’s interaction with the rest of the world

-those who conduct American foreign policy have two sets of interests to bear in mind…parochial in the county and as a participant in the international community as a whole

-America’s role is not that as the messiah of the world…the redeemer of the rest of humanity

-a very modest and restrained foreign policy is called for…an isolationism (to use a term not very meaningful

-at present foreign policy decisions are scattered all over a vast Washington bureaucracy…the power to make decisions has been fragmented

-Congress has a place in the designing of foreign policy…but here is where politics come in

-the duty of the State Department is to the president and the secretary of State what was in the national interest

-while it may appear to be a dark and despairing view of the human predicament that emerges, the challenge is to see what can be done, and then to have the heart and the resolution to attempt it
Top of Page