Occupy Wall Street and Yachts

An article from the Montreal Gazette states that the popular narrative of the United States is “thickly populated with unscrupulous corporate titans, greedy bankers and insidertrading hedge-fund managers.” It then goes on to say that the Occupy Wall Street movement “ignores the fact that many of the wealthy are sports stars and entertainers, and that their ranks include professionals such as doctors, lawyers, consultants and even some of our favourite progressive economists. In other words, the rich today are more likely to be working than idle.” This article bothers me to no end because the author is clearly quite ignorant about what Occupy Wall Street is actually protesting. I would challenge the author to read an article on an alternative media website or even go to a demonstration and talk to the protesters to see what they really want. One protester even stated they do not oppose the rich. They don’t oppose extravagant lifestyles because it is none of their business what you spend your money on. If you’re a rich person who worked hard for their money and bought a yacht just because you want one, good for you! Give me a ride! However, if you are a corporate moneyed CEO, and you are stealing money from people, you DO NOT deserve to be rich. And you definitely do not deserve a yacht.

This article goes on to become even more annoying by saying that “something other than plutocrat-friendly policies is largely responsible for the growing [income] inequality. That something is education and skills… To acknowledge the fact that the broken educational and skillsbuilding system is responsible for much of the growing inquality that ordinary people experience would, however, detract from the larger populist agenda of rallying the masses against the very rich. It has the inconvenient implication that the poor have a role in pulling themselves out of the morass.” My first reaction to this paragraph is that the author is really digging deep to find a reason to hate Occupy Wall Street. But that’s just me. Taking a look at how the author argues that the broken education system is the reason for inequality, my response to this is that he has the whole issue twisted. If there was less inequality, then more money might be able to go to funding for education. The 99% would pay less taxes, struggle less with money, not have to take out loans to get an education. Maybe the high school drop-out rate would be less if money was more spread out and used for education reform. Maybe the college dropout rate would be lower if students were better prepared during high school and got the support and fulfillment that they need.

Furthermore, the author takes a stab at the “poor” and ultimately insinuates that they are lazy by saying that “it has the inconvenient implication that the poor have a role in pulling themselves out of the morass.” Let’s see, does the author really think that the “poor” who camped out in Zuccotti parked really enjoyed sleeping in the cold, not having hot water, not being able to sleep on a mattress, etc? Occupy Wall Street has evolved out of necessity. It is the last resort for the “poor.” These people are not lazy. The “poor” did not create this situation for themselves. Many of the 99% are struggling due to the oppressive nature of our “democracy.” In conclusion, I would ask the author to reevaluate his position on Occupy Wall Street after researching more about this movement through alternative media sources and direct interaction with those in support of and involved with the movement.

Malcolm X/BPP & Occupy Wall Street

“You will never get real freedom and recognition between black and white people in this country without destroying the country, without destroying the present political system, without destroying the present economic system, without rewriting the entire constitution. It will be a complete destruction of everything that America supposedly stands for.”

When we watched a documentary about the Black Panther Party, I was enchanted by this quote by Malcolm X because I think was right. Has anything changed since 50 years ago when this statement was made?

I will have to argue that nothing has changed substantially. We can relate the Black Panther Party to the current Occupy Wall Street movement. Another quote from the documentary on BPP stated that the “government moved in when efforts showed a little bit of success.” Looking at Occupy Wall Street, the government is making attempts to disband Occupy movements around the country. This can be characterized by the recent dismantling of the Occupy camp at Zuccotti Park. 50 years ago when Malcolm X and the Black Panther Party were fighting for their rights as citizens of the United States, the government moved in and made attempts to disband the BPP. Currently, United States citizens all over the country are once again fighting for their rights and the government and law enforcement are doing their best to hinder their efforts.

They weren’t lying when they said history repeats itself. When will we learn from it?

Why I didn’t write a personal contract

I decided not to write a personal contract in the beginning of the semester because I knew that I would not keep to the task of writing in my journal once a week. Perhaps I should have come up with a different contract for something more attainable for my lifestyle and work ethic. Despite the fact that Law & Society made me think critically each time I attended, I did not write my thoughts down. I need to learn to challenge myself.

Why don’t I write a journal once a week?

Maybe it has to do with carrots and sticks, or the lack thereof in this ongoing assignment. Since the journal was not due every week, but rather once or twice per semester, there was not much opportunity for reward or punishment. Every other professor I have had uses the carrot and stick method, wherein they ask for an assignment due at a certain time, and then gives us a grade depending on how good they think it is. The tough part about this assignment is that the responsibility is all my own. First, I have to promise to MYSELF, not the professor, that I will write in this journal once a week. Second, the subject matter in these journals consists of my own thoughts and reflections, which cannot exactly be “graded” by a professor.

I have found that the lack of carrots and sticks in this assignment has its pros and cons for me.  A pro is that I was able to freely express my thoughts without the pressure of a grade lurking in the back of my mind. I find this to be the most important aspect of the journal and this method should be practiced more often. As Osho states in “Freedom,” “if individuals have freedom, are psychologically free, are spiritually free, then naturally the collective will be spiritually free” (xiii). This assignment gave me the freedom that Osho talks about in the previous quotation. If carrots and sticks were removed from society as a whole, imagine the freedom that each and every one of us could have.

The only con that I find with the carrot and stick-free method is due to my own personal faults. I did not push myself to write in this journal frequently enough. Although I retained a lot of information and gained critical thinking skills throughout the semester, reflecting on what I learned each week would have been an even more effective method of learning. In conclusion, I will “contract” myself to reflect on what I learn later in life in order to become a better thinker and learner.

Walmart

"Undergraduate students overwhelmingly described sexism as a less serious problem than racism. Despite the fact that those same students were more likely to have experienced, observed, or heard about acts of sexism than of racism on their campuses, and despite the fact that the sex-based ones were far more likely than the race-based ones to involved physical acts including violence, from men grabbing and groping women to raping them, the majority of our participants said that they find racism more upsetting and consider it more of a problem that needs to be dealt with than sexism. Sexism, some even suggested, is only natural" (Flanders).

The previous quote was taken from the article "Walmart: Too Big to Sue?" from CommonDreams.org. I find this quote interesting because before reading it, I would have agreed with the fact that racism is more of a problem than sexism. To me, this seems like a societal problem that must be dealt with. The fact that people find racism more of a problem might suggest that we are not doing a good enough job spreading awareness of sexism. Furthermore, this means that our society does not recognize what can be considered sexism. There are multiple instances in every day life where sexism can be detected. For instance, survey the number of professors or administrators on campus: is there a majority of men or women? In most cases, it will be men. This is due to the patriarchal hierarchy that our society relies on. Not only is sexism not being handled correctly on campuses, but it is clear that is not being handled on a corporate level, as Walmart clearly displays. For example, the following quote from the same article is one example of how Walmart is discriminating against women. "Wal-Mart paid women less in nearly every job category, even though women had, on average, better performance evaluations and more seniority."

Racism & the law

"'...crimes committed by blacks are the products of their colonial relationship to the greater society, which, in turn, 'is based on racial inequality and perpetuated by the political state.' Staples maintains that blacks are not protected by American law, that police brutality is a fact of daily experience in black America, and that the cultural values of white supremacy place little significance on the lives of blacks in U.S. society" (Baker & Davin, 67). The previous quote explains that blacks are undermined by whites and that blacks commit crimes as a result of their poor relationship with the law created by white men and the blacks are very often subjected to police brutality. The Troy Davis case is another example of how blacks are undermined in our society. Just as the previous quote explains the relationship blacks have with the law, the following quote gives an example: "Jeffrey Sapp... signed a police statement declaring that dazvis had told him that he had shot MacPahil. Now, at the evidentiary hearing, he said he'd done so under duress. 'There were police in front of me, behind me,' Sapp testified. 'I was so scared, I would say anything they wanted. 'Just say Troy told you! Just say Troy told you!''" (Marlowe). The Troy Davis case evidently displays blacks being undermined by the law. However, not only is the victim, Troy Davis, being subjected to unfair treatment and sentencing, but witnesses and friends of Troy Davis are being treated poorly as well. It could even be said that racism under the white man's law "does not discriminate", as it is found in all facets of the law.

The Beginning

The goal of this blog is to use the elements of thought and apply them to classwork and readings in order to get a better understanding of the system of law as it relates to society.

During the first class, we were given an exercise to do relating to an excerpt from the bible. One of the topics that we covered which I found interesting related to beliefs trumping morals. For example, the ten commandments of Christianity clearly state that murder is wrong. In this case, the belief that homosexuality is a sin lead to many people dying because of their sexual orientation. To relate this to present times, murder is still against the law, but there are still people in our society that are allowed to kill. Some examples of these people are the military and the state, such as the CIA or the FBI. Very rarely are these groups reprimanded for killing. One example that I can think of is military brutality overseas being leaked to the public. The general population was shocked and sickened by the terrible treatment of Iraqi citizens and soldiers. In order for the military to keep its dignity and to make it seem that this type of treatment was not commonplace, they imposed punishments for the American soldiers that the public knew were involved. The military/state did this in order to maintain our trust in them, our respect for them, and to ensure that we would still obey them. As long as we still trust, respect and obey them, they will still make the laws and have control.