Log in to StudySoup
Get Full Access to UCSD - DOC 2 - Class Notes - Week 1
Join StudySoup for FREE
Get Full Access to UCSD - DOC 2 - Class Notes - Week 1

Already have an account? Login here
Reset your password

jeff gagnon ucsd

jeff gagnon ucsd


School: University of California - San Diego
Department: Doctor of Nursing Practice
Course: Justice
Professor: Violeta sanchez
Term: Winter 2017
Cost: 25
Name: DOC 2 Notes
Description: This is a complete set of the lecture notes from DOC 2, with Jeff Gagnon as the lecturer.
Uploaded: 06/13/2017
54 Pages 199 Views 1 Unlocks

then why does the government still screw him over?

○ What is the impact on human life?

● Regardless of justice, what’s the human impact?

DOC 2 - Gagnon “Let America Be America Again”, Langston Hughes, 1935 ● Langston Hughes ● Historical context ○ Harlem Renaissance ○ Great Depression and Jim Crow Segregation ○ Federal Housing Agency (FHA) Redlining ○ “Last Hired, First Fired” Analysis ● What is analysis? ○ Unpacking each part; see how they fit together;  lookingIf you want to learn more check out What supplies blood that carries O and nutrients and collects waste material from the cells?
Don't forget about the age old question of What is confocal microscope?
If you want to learn more check out abbott company completed the bank reconciliation and needs to record the $30 service charge from the bank. the journal entry to record this transaction would be:
We also discuss several other topics like How many bones are there in humans?
Don't forget about the age old question of How Are Uncollectibles Accounted for When Using the Direct Write-Off Method?
We also discuss several other topics like Who is the father of probation?
at the words, ideas, and seeing how they contribute to  the larger points ● Second speaker interrupts first speaker in a silent way ○ Second speaker uses parentheses ● First three stanzas: ‘introduce a conversation’ ● Competing views of America’s history ● The collective voice ● Repetition of ‘I am’ → Individualism ● The individual is calling for people to come together ○ All the groups aforementioned are those who are  ‘forgotten’ ○ Not blatant discrimination, but is still discrimination ○ These groups were against each other in many  places ■ Different political views ○ This poem brings the groups all together ○ Shared in common: exploitation ○ Difference: racial formation ○ In common: class formation ● Giddy multitude→ Caliban ● Speaker 2 disagrees with Speaker 1 in a civil manner ○ Speaker 2 doesn’t name names ● ‘We, the People’ ○ Poem calls for awareness, the way America is  supposed to be ○ Justice: there are founding principles that distribute  equality and opportunities ○ Injustice (poem): when groups are trampled on by  others (exploited by others) ○ Founding Principles: framework of justice ■ Makes it messy■ Gives us a reason of what justice might  be Bradwell v. Illinois ● Supreme Court Case ● Historical Context ○ 13th, 14th, 15th Amendments ○ 14th: women did not get equal citizenship ○ 15th: African American men are able to vote, but not  African American women ○ Citizenship, voting rights, individualism, public good:  defined through male supremacy/patriarchy ● Susan B. Anthony: imprisoned for voting ● Gender formation ● Citizens and voters = males in the 1800s ● The definition of public good changes according to each situation Analysis ● Background/biography ● Court’s ruling and reasoning ○ Women are ‘unfit’ for civil life ○ Nature and ‘creator’ ● Justice Joseph P. Bradley ● Turned her down ● Pg 24 left column ○ ‘On the contrary’... ○ Not equality → hierarchy based on biology →  scientific biasDOC 2 - Gagnon Metaphor ● 750 declared engineering ● Graduation rate: 80% ● Stable for about 8 years ● Outsourcing engineers ● Is this just and fair? Or is it unfair in some way? ● Don’t think black and white ○ Embrace nuances ○ Leaning toward one side, but ‘I see that it is  complicated’ ● Everyone has equal opportunity ○ ‘Just’ ■ It expands to global opportunities ● ‘Public good’ ■ No country is obligated to give out jobs ■ No corporation is obligated to give out  jobs ■ Goal is profit ■ Principle of market justice: principle that  is most just is the one that maximizes output ■ Not about public good? ■ No public is owed any good → individual  finds their own good ■ Social Darwinism: every man for his own ○ ‘Injust’ ■ Ruining other people’s lives to make  yours better ● Less pay ● Harsher treatment ● Worse living conditions ● Expansion of the public good  might be tempered by the idea that ‘you can exploit  them by treating them worse’ ● More for individual good ■ Individualism taken too far is unjust ■ ‘Civic virtue’ ● Abide by principles (don’t be  greedy) but not by other people’s expense ● To what degree are CEO’s  taking advantage of outsourced workers but also the  people at home? ○ Individualism● To what degree do  corporations owe their success to the workers? ○ Take advantage  of public resources, take it overseas Goodyear + Firestone + General Motors ● Massive unemployment ● Removed tax base ○ No good resources ● Domino effect ● Justice makes us think about lots of things? ● Regardless of justice, what’s the human impact? ○ What is the impact on human life? Shay’s Rebellion - Foner ● Massive debt ● Shay = revolutionary soldier ○ He thought that if he sacrificed his life in the war,  then why does the government still screw him over? ● Rebellion of the masses ○ Led by locals ○ You can’t seize land and throw people in jail when  they’re good people ○ They haven't been invited to voice their ideas  democratically ● The locals are wiped out by the militia ● Excess of democracy running amok ● Strong national government ○ Creates Bill of Rights and Constitution ○ Class formation ○ Page 14: bottom left column ○ ‘Government of the people’ ■ Points out class formation ● Hamilton’s idea (he was no  apologist) ● Rich are smarter, more elite ● Said that the elite should not  act on their own eliteness and selfishness, and act  for the public good ○ Page 18: right column Extend the Sphere ■ Madison: doesn’t care but he should ● People have dangerous  enthusiasm ● Shay’s Rebellion● Can’t trust everyone ● Concentrate power in a  Republican representative style ○ Foner is trying to get us to see that Madison was  already aware of the class formation in the U.S. ■ Creating a system ■ Describe how there’s a ‘noble pursuit’ ■ Contradiction → protecting their own  interests ■ Contradictions everywhereDOC 2 - Gagnon Course Review ● Lecture ● Course Readers ● Sections ● Writing Assignments Readings for Wednesday ● Numbers 2 and 3 → Reference used ● Number 4 ● Reading Tips ○ Read before the lecture ○ Read for ‘conversation’ ■ Jump in → understand writers more ■ What is the point/contribution of the  passage? ○ What is the argument being made? ○ Read for ‘evidence’ and examples Roots of ‘Justice’ ● Justice: Latin Root: ‘upright’ or ‘fair’ and ‘equitable’ ○ Term evolved through languages ● French root: legal rights ● English root: ‘rewards’ for what each person is ‘due’ ○ Involves thinking of different contexts ○ We need to apply it to different contexts ○ Relates, but is still different ● Helpful to think about injustice ○ Not fair, but equal ○ ‘I can’t tell you what justice is, but I can’t tell you  what it is not’ ● Who’s left out of the community and why? U.S. Declaration of Independence, 1776 ● ‘We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created  equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable  Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ‘ ○ No requirements, but the terms Life/Liberty/Pursuit of Happiness is vague, hard to put to practice ○ Application of rights is different from theory U.S. Preamble of the Constitution, 1769● ‘We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more  perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the  Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and  establish this Constitution for the United States of America’ ○ Conflict of who is included in the pronoun ‘We’ ■ Never defined, secure, agreeable for  everyone ○ ‘Union’ ■ Who gets to say when we are unified? ■ Who decides this? ○ ‘Tranquility’ ■ What does ‘peace’ mean? ■ No fighting? Everyone gets along? ■ Who’s defining it? ○ ‘Common Defense’ ■ Defend against whom? Runaway Trolley ● Analysis? ● Avoiding future disasters like these? ● Real world issues? ● Kill 1 or 5? ● Choice → intention → pull the lever or no dilemma → tensions  between common good and the individual in society ○ How do you protect the individual and the  community at the same time? ● Belief systems influence the decisions we make ● Change → how do we convince people to make change? ○ Execute ideas ● What is just or fair for all individuals in society? ● What is just or fair for the larger ‘public’ or ‘common good’? ● DOC 2: learning how to analyze these tensions, and their  histories, and write about themDOC 2 - Gagnon John v. Jennifer ● Background: why do a study? ○ Two arguments ○ Belief that women are biologically less capable ○ Belief that women ‘choose’ other careers ○ Are men and women innately different? ■ How are they being portrayed as  different? ■ And is it fair and just? ■ Is John v. Jennifer an example of that, or  not? ● What’s in the public good’s best interest when it comes to  training and development of the best scientists? ● Best, most qualified scientists are accepted into programs →  promote differences and hierarchy ● Patriarchy is similar, but it’s about male domination first ○ Promotes that males are better Social Construction Model ● Star Wars Legos ○ Action ○ Violence? ○ Aggression ○ Destruction ○ Discrimination ● Doll House ○ Boys are meant to explore the outside ○ Girls are taught to stay at home and cook ○ Are these assumptions that this toy is for girls and  Legos are for boys? ● Punishments and rewards shape our behaviors and ideals ● Our surroundings shape our ideals ● How do we make meaning out of our lives? ● Which jobs are masculine and feminine? ○ MASTER NARRATIVE ● Jobs are also gendered ● Mentoring shapes meaning○ Mentor: guide, shows you the ropes, teaches you,  shows you how to become professional, knows the system,  incredibly valued ● Not just what you know, it’s about who you knowDOC 2 - Gagnon ● Social constructs: race, gender, bias ● Don’t use quotes unless it’s very powerful ○ otherwise→ paraphrase, but cite ● When in doubt, cite John v. Jennifer ● Background: why do a study? ○ “Women are biologically incapable of doing STEM  work” ○ Hearing arguments (two) from colleagues: ■ Women are uncommon in STEM because  they chose not to do this work (personal choice) ● They are qualified, perhaps ■ Assumption: women are incapable ■ Assumption: women prefer less scientific  work ○ Objectivity and data ○ The study and its findings: two resumes for one lab  manager positions ○ 100 research scientists in chemistry, biology, physics ● Four Questions: ○ Competency ○ Hireability ○ Starting Pay ○ Willing to mentor? ● Scientists male and female favor John over Jennifer ○ Analysis ■ Ways of reading the study and its  findings ● Some bias exists? → study  suggests bias ■ Cancels out biology and ‘choice’? ■ Blame individual scientists? ● Did they pick 100 biased  scientists? ● Keep this option open ■ Blame all men? ● To what extent does this  study exist in a larger system of patriarchy?■ What is the role of the scientists in a  larger system/society? ■ What is the role of the individual in a  larger system? Allan Johnson ● The problem with ‘individualizing’? (25) ● Thesis (27) ● ‘Paths of least resistance’ ● The system defined (30) ● Patriarchy defined (34) ● One bad apple spoils the bunch ○ One bad person here is the problem ○ Get rid of them and society will get better ● You did not create the structures of injustice, but we participate  in them, we’re all involved more or less ● ‘Paths of least resistance’ (29) ○ Why people choose to be a bystander ■ People have the power to make choices ■ Resistance is risky ■ People don’t challenge the status quo ● How many people need to take the path of resistance for things  to change? ● Patriarchy shapes the path of least resistance ● Ideologies set out rewards and punishments for how we roll and  how we actDOC 2 ­ Gagnon Discussion ● Preconceived notions about autism ○ No range of autism ○ Autism → disability ○ Vaccines cause autism ● FINAL: ○ Page 177: new morbidities of childhood ● Potential IDs ○ Public good ­ Sandel ○ Civic virtue ○ War on drugs ­ Michelle Alexander ○ Hashtag Activism ○ Population Bomb ○ Sterilization ○ UFW ● Life expectancy for a farm worker: 48 years ● Tension page 153: UFW and others (authority) ● Construct: citizens and migrant workers ● Why would the government not care about the migrant workers? ○ They can’t vote ○ Illegal citizens ○ Fear of the government ○ Tentative employment ○ Racist ideologies and classist ideologies ○ Health responsibilities = family ○ Minority ○ Lack of government protection ○ Money ○ Forced into conformity ● Start with a binary, and then move into nuanced grey area DOC 2 Lecture ● What are some connections between this brief study of pesticides and farm workers and  the study of climate change history in Merchants of Doubt? ● Background context for Cesar Chavez, ‘Address … On the Pen is of Pesticides’ (1989) ● 1960s: the United Farm Workers (Chicano and Filipino) organized ○ Farmworkers and domestics left out of New Deal (1936) right to form  labor unions ○ Nonviolent civil disobedience? ○ Delano Grape Strike ○ Successful! ­­ union, pay, work conditions ○ Challenged racial and class formations 1980s Historical Context ● Reagan: government regulations harm the public good ● Context: ‘Reaganomics’ and the ‘fruits’ of ‘deregulation’ (Foner, 144, 149)● CA governor at the time, Governor George Deukmejian halted farm labor laws (152,  153) ○ Reduce regulation on pesticide usage (for consumers and workers) ● Strategy: take invisible justices and make them visible ○ How do you do that? Analyzing Analytical and Argumentative Strategies ● Cesar Chavez did a 36­day fast ○ Brought attention to the farmers ● Pesticides from invisible to visible ● ‘Storytelling’ → personal stories as support for arguments ● Pg 151 ● Use and analysis of statistics for support (153­154) ● Naming ‘structures’ with power to support analysis (155) ● Leaving it up to the reader to draw the connection ● Not really a cause adn effect, but a connection ○ More testing and evaluaton, not just banning things ● Page 154: right column (agencies that can help but are not helping) ○ EPA: a lot of power, but won’t do it ● Page 155: American Medical Association ○ State of California ○ Agrichemical Industry: wants to maximize profit, so they won’t do it ○ Universities: land­grant colleges/public universities ○ What is the worth and value? ● Chavez asks, ‘who will protect farm workers from poisoning?’ (154)DOC 2 - Gagnon ● Prisoner: costs the state $45,000 a year ● A college student costs the state $8,667 ● Prior to 1980, public investment focused on public good ○ 55% of spending went into locking people up ○ Paying for workers/maintaining the prison ■ War on Drugs ■ Students pay for more things by  themselves ■ Contradiction ■ Less education for people at this rate ■ School-to-prison pipeline ● Less education, less people  go to prison ● Weird logic ■ Prison-Industrial Complex ● Describes the overlapping  interests of government and industry that use  surveillance, policing and imprisonment as solutions  to economic, social and political problems ● Not only prisons, but also  mutually reinforcing web of relationships, between  and not limited to, prisons, the probation service, the police, the courts, all the companies that profit from  transporting, feeding and exploiting prisoners, etc. ● Also about cheap labor and  free labor by inmates who produce things that get  sold and profit the jail ● Interest in not closing prisons ● Since 1980, California built 22 prisons, and one university Historical Context ● 1970s and 1980s: Rise of Neoliberalism ○ David Harvey ○ Neoliberalism as creative destruction○ A theory of political economic practices that  proposes that human well-being can best be advanced by  liberating individual entrepreneurial freedoms and skills within an institutional framework characterized by strong private property  rights, free markets and free trade ○ The role of the state is to create and preserve the  institutional framework appropriate to such practices ○ It must set up those military, defence, police, and  legal structures and functions required to secure private property rights and to guarantee, by force if need be, the proper  functioning of markets. ● From ‘public’ social safety nets to ‘private’ market freedom ○ E.g. ‘public’ education spending ● Major cultural backlash against gains of civil rights movement ● Access to employment → a factor of whether people go to jail or  do drugs ○ Applies to all races, not just a select fewDOC 2 - Gagnon Lecture 6 ● The military was excluded to women even though they were perfectly  qualified ○ Gender structure in society ● Not all pilots come from military backgrounds ○ But it’s still uncommon to find women pilots ● Workforce: management positions go to: ○ White males ○ White females ○ Hispanic men ○ Asian men ○ Black men ○ Asian women ○ Black women ○ Hispanic women ● Intersectionality (race, class, gender) ● Usually women are at the bottom, but white women are at the top of  the hierarchy ○ They are white before anything else ○ People look at race first ● Intersectionality (from the Reader, page 2): the shifting interaction  among categories and ideologies related to gender, class, and race in a  specific culture in a specific historical period; other categories such as religion and sexuality may become relevant in some cases (rotating kaleidoscope);  the context of each category changes along the continuum of history  (rotating kaleidoscope moving along a horizontal line) ● Gives rise to positions that describe both at the same time (race and  gender) ● How does this study, or data about Silicon Valley, give ways of  analyzing the John v. Jennifer study, even though the John v. Jennifer study  only has two variables? ● If the John v. Jennifer study were expanded to include more names,  what would that look like? Glass Ceiling ● Blocks people from ascending the hierarchy ● They can see where they cannot get to ○ Evokes a feeling of being trapped, unfairly held back from  achieving higher ● Society has several glass ceilings when dealing with intersectionality Muller v. Oregon, 1908 ● 1903: Oregon lawmakers created a law ● “No female should be employed in any mechanical establishment, or  factory, or laundry, for more than 10 hours a day”● Protective legislation ● 1908: Curt Muller is the owner of a Portland laundromat, violated the  law ● It was the norm to work in factories at the time ○ It had decent pay, but was unhealthy ● 16 hours a day, little to no breaks ● Dangerous conditions, both physically and mentally/emotionally ● States are not allowed to make laws that affect the workplace ● Belief: not alright to regulate businesses ● Free market ● DECISION ○ Supreme Court upholds the law ○ Monumental decision? ○ Why is it so important? ○ Why is it so controversial? ○ The Supreme Court focused more on protecting women in  the workplace, not all workers ■ Saw this as a gender case ○ Social Construct of Gender ■ Court participates in gender formation ■ Relies on scientific sexism ● The Court’s “Job” is to protect women ○ Men don’t need this protection because they are more  masculine, hence, stronger ● Says that women are supposed to be treated well because they are  tools of procreation ○ They need to be protected so that they can have healthy  babies ● Complications: wage adjustmentDOC 2 - Gagnon The Color of Justice ● Premise of the chapter ● Ways to read the essay ○ ‘Cause and effect’ analysis ● Her thesis (page 64) ○ In the War on Drugs-- the ‘enemy’ is ‘racially  identified’ ● She wrote in a more accessible style ○ So more people could understand her message ● Simpler style ● Writers are taught to ‘hook’ the reader (high school and college) ○ Makes them want to continue reading/engaged, even if they don’t have to ● Is the War on Drugs racially biased The Importance of Using Evidence to Support Thesis ● 2000: seven states African Americans constituted 80-90% of all  drug offenders in prison (64) ● 15 states = African Americans sent to prison on drug charges at  rates from 20-57% greater than that of white men ● Prison admissions for African Americans in 2000 was 26 times  the level in 1983 ● Latinos: 22 times level in 1983 ● White: 8 times level in 1983 ○ Master Narratives go back with us a long way ○ It’s still present in society Counterclaims and Evidence ● In 2000 (height of problem) ○ White students use cocaine at 7 times the rate of  African Americans ○ Use heroin at 8 times the rate of African Americans ○ Identical rates of marijuana usage ○ White youth (12-17_ are greater than 33% likely to  have sold illegal drugs ● White youth were most likely of any racial and ethnic group to be guilty of illegal drug possession and sales (but not go to prison) ● White youth have three times the number of drug-related  emergency room visits for overdose Sentencing Disparities● African Americans receive prison sentences that are 10% longer  than whites for the same crimes ● Also 21% more likely to receive mandatory minimum sentences ● 20% more likely to be sentenced to prison for the same crimes The Problem of ‘Discretion’ ● Noticing the wording of her analysis (67) ● Focuses on ‘rules’ and ‘incentives’ for fighting the War on Drugs,  rather than individuals ● Paths of least resistance; larger system dictates how things  should be played ○ Financial incentives Financial Incentives ● Byrne Justice Assistance Grant Programs ● Financial incentives for arrest numbers (e.g. quantity of arrests) ● Leads to the targeting of easy arrests ● 1999-2007: 80% of all arrests were for minor possession Felonies and “Three Strikes” ● California Law: early 1990s ● Drug possession originally counted as ‘serious’ ● Three strikes, and you’re out! ○ 1st: regular sentencing (1+ years) ○ 2nd: double sentence/term ○ 3rd: severest punishment Brief History of the War on Drugs ● 1880s-1920s: opium and racialization of Chinese immigrants ○ Anti-immigration sentiment ● Early 20th century: Marijuana and racialization of Mexican  Americans ● Early 20th century: cocaine and racialization of African Americans ● Immigrants and drugs = a danger to ‘our’ women and children ● African Americans = Southern menace 1970s-1980s ● President Richard Nixon (1971) War on Drugs Timeline (provided by TA) ● 1971: Nixon declares a war on drugs ● 1973: DEA is created → Drug Enforcement Agency● 1976: Carter campaigns on decriminalizing marijuana ● 1977: the media glamorizes cocaine use ● 1984: Nancy Reagan’s ‘Just Say No’ Movement (aimed at white  students in good schools) ● 1985: Crack use explodes in NYC ● 1990: George H.W. Bush increases military spending (50%) for  War on Drugs ● 1993: NAFTA ● 1995: Proposed reduction in sentencing rejected by the courtDOC - Gagnon Discussion Notes ● Pre 1980s: 1975-1981: 5 cases in women ● 1981: 5 cases of a rare pneumonia in gay men in LA (GRID: Gay-related immune deficiency) ● 1982: First Congressional meeting about crisis (GRID) ● 1983: HIV identified ● 1985: President Reagan first spoke about AIDS ● By the end of 1985, 20,303 infected ● HIV → AIDS, no symptoms for a long time ● Writing Body Paragraphs: ○ Assertion ○ Example ○ Explanation ○ Significance: why is this important? DOC 2 Notes ● Do corporations have the right to pursue profits even when their  actions endanger human life? ● Which side should the government protect: human life or corporate? ● Cigarette companies? Declaration of Independence ● They are endowed by their creator [...] governments are instituted  among men Inherent Contradiction ● Public good ● Human rights ● Private liberty ● Property rights ● Business rights ● Corporate rights ● Public good versus private good; how to balance Martin Shkreli ● Former CEO of Turing Pharmaceutical ● Bought manufacturing rights to Daraprim (Sept. 2015) ○ Drug used to treat infections in AIDs patients ● Immediately raised price 56x from 13.50$ to $750 per pill ● Was this just? ● Government did nothing to roll back price → what could AIDs patients  do? ● What about the 1980’s AIDs Epidemic? Historical Context● 1969 Stonewall Riots start gay rights movement ● By 1980s: lesbian and gay rights had made some progress, but LGBT  community still marginalized in US society as a whole ● 1981: unknown immune deficiency identified in 5 gay men in  California, causes rapid death ● 1982-1986: research on disease and government response is slow,  epidemic spreads, many deaths ● 1987: ACT UP formed and aids activism starts ● 1988: AIDs activists occupy FDA Why was the 1988 Protest Successful? ● United in Anger ● Douglas Crimp ○ Educated everyone involved in the protest so that they  could communicate the messages smoothly with the reporters ○ Good intersection of race/class/gender ○ Stopped businesses to catch the attention of people ○ Didn’t give up until their demands were met “Before Occupy” by Douglas Crimp ● AIDs activists educated themselves on FDA drug approval process ● Activists had professionally designed media campaign ● Activists had clear demands ● Activists had effective props and demonstration theater at protest ● After FDA demonstration, activists kept up pressure on government  until their demands were metDOC 2 - Gagnon ● Sick people → medication is expensive ● So should they steal it? ● A lto of medicine is produced using public investment ○ The medicine should be more accessible and  available to the public ● Publicized or privatized ● Stealing generates no public sympathy ○ Destroys public image ● Good public image → more access to medication ● Something unjust -- waiting for the public help is too slow, you  need something more immediate Wednesday Recap ● ACT-UP’s challenge to the FDA in the 1980s-1990s ○ A lot like Shay’s Rebellion ● Successful strategies for civil disobedience ● Page 28: “The success of SEIZE CONTROL [...] following the  action” ● Reveals tension that goes back to 1789 ○ Should the government protect private profit or  human rights? Or both? ● Mantra: government needs to be bigger → more freedom ● ACT UP: government too big → too bureaucratic ○ Faced resistance, government should be smaller ○ Usually so that companies need more freedom, not  to make medicine more accessible (contradiction) Politics and Personal Life at the Turn of the Century ● Contradiction: Cheney encouraged a family to have a mother and a father, but his daughter is lesbian ● Hypocritical behavior ○ D’Emilio: personal ideologies clash with political  ideologies ● Think ‘like a writer’ as you read this chapter ● Introduction needs to have a ‘hook’● Provides historical context and thesis--which focuses on ‘tensions and inconsistencies’ (79). ● D’Emilio’s claim: there are contradictions Key Examples ● Pg 80: The rise of the ‘religious right’ ● Pg 81: From Reagan era to 2000s ○ Shift in American politics ○ Pg 82: “DOMA” (Defense Marriage Act) ■ Law created the prevent states from  making same-sex marriage legal ■ CONTRADICTION: defined marriage as  heterosexual only → Republicans said that the government  should be smaller, but they still insist on interfering in  personal matters such as marriage.DOC 2 - Gagnon The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration The 13th Amendment ● Passed into law by Congress in 1865 at the conclusion of the U.S. Civil  War ● Was supposed to have legally abolished slavery in the U.S. forever ● No exceptions to it (Article 13) ○ But Amendment 13 has an exception ● Did the 13th amendment really abolish slavery? ● CONTRADICTION: Slavery is officially over, but not in all states? Historical Context ● Reconstruction: 1865-1877 ○ Federal laws are more powerful that state laws ● Post-Reconstruction and ‘old’ Jim Crow Era: 1877-1965 Black Codes ● Instilled in states that took the African American rights away ● “Slavery by Another Name” ● Farmers cannot walk near the railroad tracks, cannot talk to women,  cannot hang out at night in public places ○ Never explicitly applied to African Americans, but only  enforced for African Americans ● Vagrancy statutes ○ Getting arrested for being unemployed ○ Prison sentence → work on plantation instead of going to  jail → regression/white supremacy system ○ They often lose their property The “Old” Jim Crow ● Characteristics: African Americans could not: ○ Vote ○ Serve on juries ○ Obtain equal/fair housing ○ Gain acceptance into segregated schools and universities ○ Gain access to well-paying jobs ○ Challenge police brutalityThe “New” Jim Crow ● Characteristics: People with a felony cannot ○ Vote ○ Serve on juries ○ Obtain equal/fair housing ○ Gain acceptance into segregated schools and universities ○ Gain access to well-paying jobs ○ Challenge police brutality ● Contradictions are still being worked out Historical Context ● More African Americans incarcerated today ○ Than in 1850 (the peak of slavery) ● In 2004, more African Americans were disenfranchised (could not vote) due to felony convictions ○ Than in 1870 ○ When the 15th Amendment finally granted African  American (men) the right to vote ● From Foner to 2000 Addressing Contradictions of Justice ● How to address and change the contradictions in the system ○ Raise awareness, rehab ● How to avoid paths of least resistance ○ Closing public services in hopes of private gainDOC 2 ­ Gagnon The Religious Right and “Family Values” ● “Family Values” = a growing “belief system” of the 1990s­2000s ● D’Emilio: “government” became a bad word ● Republican party went under a transformation in time ● Page 79­80: Key terms ○ Religious right (‘politically right’ → conservative) ○ Split: Republican views of individualism ○ New definition of Conservatism ○ Government should take an active role in people’s lives Context ● Economic ○ deregulation  ○ Less government involved ○ Promoted individualism ● Personal Morals ○ Religious right ○ Government should take active role over people’s personal lives ○ Christian values ○ ‘Family values’ ○ How are family values being constructed during this time? ■ Heteronormativity  ● Every family is headed by a male  and female in a marital relationship ● Strong opposition to LGBT, single family households ■ BUT: what are some other social issues that we  have studied that might tear families apart? ● Financial issues ● Domestic violence ● Unequal relationships →  patriarchy ● Mass incarceration during ‘War on  Drugs’ ● Interracial marriages,  representational obstacles● Children who have disabilities → stress ● immigration/deportation 1965 Alabama Literacy Test ● Helps us understand MLK’s Letter From a Birmingham Jail ● 1877­1965: prevent people from voting ● 68 questions ○ Designed for you to fail ● For people who wanted to register to vote ● Given by the Registrar of Voters ● Mostly for African Americans ○ Jim Crow segregation laws ● Poll taxes (if you passed the test) ● Justice in the process of democracyDOC 2 - Gagnon Recap: Literacy Test ● Structural racism ● Intended to preserve system of white supremacy through control of  voting ● Connected to systemic segregation of public goods and resources ○ Schools, buses, employment, legal system, housing, etc. ○ Almost everything in society is separated by gender and  race, and it was legal ● The literacy tests were legal ○ Segregation was legal ● Remember: GI Bill (DOC 1) ● 1947: 3229 GI Bill guaranteed loans for homes, businesses and farms  made in 1947 in Mississippi, for example, only two were offered to black  veterans “Birmingham Campaign” ● Organized boycotts of city services ● King and others arrested in Birmingham, Alabama ● 13th time King got arrested → wanted to get arrested, stay in jail for a  lot fo time ● Broke state laws that banned mass public demonstrations 8 Alabama Clergyman ● Religious leaders wrote to MLK (MLK was a minister) → Christian  background ● Not opposed to what MLK was doing → sympathetic to a degree ● Thought the demonstrations were too much ● MLK is pushing too fast for change ● Bull Connor ● Don’t be mad at the protests, be mad at what led up to the protests ● A monologue, not a dialogue → no negotiation, but MLK says that it’s  needed● Have to be careful that they are not seen as aggressors and violent ● Black people don’t fight back → garner sympathy ● Direct action = breaking the law ● Tension isn’t always bad, stop avoiding the elephant in the room ● Pg 94-95 ● The majority make rules for minorities that the majority does not followDOC 2 ­ Gagnon DOC Discussion ● Eugenics ○ Compulsory sterilization typically done on those who are: ■ Mentally ill ■ Intellectually disabled ■ Physically handicapped ○ Motive for USA/Germany of eugenics: create best being, save  money used on taking care of these people ● USA ○ Began in the early 1900s­1970s ■ 30 states adopted laws ● 60000 and sterilizations ● Prohibited marriages ● Segregated thousands in colonies ● Germany ○ Began in 1933­1959 ○ 300000­400000 people ● Why? ○ US Reasoning: ■ Purify the bloodline ■ Wanted blonde­haired, blue­eyed, tall people ● Raceologists drew the standard ○ German Reasoning: ■ Racial hygiene ■ The prevention of lives not worth living ● Those who could not work and  contribute to society ● Those who could not recover ● Prevent the contamination of the  gene pool ● The US ○ Sterilized people for hereditary dementia and insanity ○ Prisoners were sterilized ○ California led the nation ■ 9782 people sterilized (mostly women) ■ Why? ● Passionate, sexually wayward,  ‘oversexual’ ● Sonoma ­ abnormally large genitals ■ California was the epicenter of the eugenics  movement■ Before WWII: ½ of sterilizations took place in CA ■ After WWII:   of sterilizations took place in CA ⅓ ● Legalizing Eugenics ○ Segregation ○ Sterilization ○ Marriage restrictions (no interracial marriages) ● Germany ○ 53% were feebleminded ○ 25.4% schizophrenia ○ 14% epilepsy ○ 7.6% congenital feeblemindedness ■ Criminals, whore/prostitutes ● The Other Category ○ Hereditary alcoholism, blindness ○ All about the money Beginnings of Yellow Power ● Associated with UC Berkeley, UCLA ● Very hidden history of Asian American activism ● Asian American Political Alliances ● Page 105 ● Page 107: study groups to learn about own background ● Same year THurgood Marshall College was created ● Amy Uyematsu (UCLA, 1969 or 1970) ○ Victims with less visible scars ● What kinds of issues would an Asian American ‘power’ movement work on  today? ○ Learning kungfu (Black Panther Platform and Asians worked  together) Dilemma ● Overpopulation will destroy the planet ● Question: ○ Is it ok for doctors to begin sterilizing women of color from low  income backgrounds without permission? ○ Taking away opportunities ○ Birth rates are tied to job opportunities ○ Opens up more choices A Real­Life Scenario ● No mas bebes ● Documentary film based on a story from the early 1970s in Los Angeles● Doctors, nurses and patients at the intersection of race, class, gender conflict.DOC 2 ­ Gagnon No mas bebes ● Sterilizations targeted poorer people ○ They didn’t know that they signed for it ○ They didn’t know what was going to happen to them ○ ‘Like rape’ ○ Rushed ○ Told about the contract when the patient was in pain, labor ■ Had no wits about them to make a clear decision  with a clear thought process ■ Forcefully sterilized during the cesarean section ● Whistleblower: Dr. Rosenfeld ○ Sterilize those who are ‘unwanted’ in society ○ Some don’t even remember signing the papers ○ Why is the film taking the time to introduce these people/portray  windows into these people's’ lives? ■ Pathos ■ Humanizes them ■ Culture: big family is important ● Strips away cultural identity ■ Helps us understand the impact of the medical  decisions made ○ A whistleblower is someone who observed unjust medical  practices, did not feel right about it, and did something about it ■ Reported to authorities ■ Had evidence ○ Don’t focus on what individuals to blame ● Goal of eugenics: slow down the birth rate in Mexican women ● The ability to speak English played a big role ○ Doctors took advantage of people’s ignorance ○ Wrong translations: cutting Fallopian tubes →  ‘cleaning the womb’ ■ Euphemism ○ ‘If you don’t sign, we won’t operate’ ■ For the sake of the child, mothers will usually sign  the papers ○ Saving the planet by preventing repopulation of minorities? ■ Racial formation ■ Racial structure■ Racism ● Historical Context: ○ The element of coercion, lack of consent ○ “The Population Bomb” ○ Targeted African Americans as well as Mexicans ■ Racial minoritiesDOC 2 ­ Gagnon ● Discussion: ○ No Mas Bebes ■ As someone who did not know about this before, I  am frustrated by how they would not hesitate to take advantage of  Mexican women when they were at an extremely vulnerable time ■ They had many hopes and dreams for their families  that were taken away ● Contradiction of the American  Dream ■ Oppression of minorities under the guise  of ‘population control’ → unfair ■ Cultural ramifications ○ 2001: Andrea Yates ■ 5 children → quiverfull ideology ■ Avoid popular culture ■ No access to birth control ■ Intersectionality of race, class, religion ● Introduction ○ Grab attention ○ Don’t start off with a definition ○ Put a little context, but not a lot ■ I.e. War on Drugs ■ Give dates ■ Time periods ■ Context ○ Leave with a lasting thought → conclusion ○ Thesis statement: too vague ○ Logical order ○ Skewer logic ○ Be wary of huge introductions ■ Put background info in a separate paragraph ○ Works are italicized ○ Job of person (scholar, historian) to make them sound more  credible ○ Lecture citation ■ (Gagnon, Jeff “lecture title”. Class Lecture. UCSD,  date. Lecture.) Lecture ● Most of the people interviewed had only one child● Teachers were narrow­minded and biased ○ Punished Chicano students more than white students ● La Femenista ○ Ana Nieto Gomez ○ Written in the same time period ○ Intersectionality of gender and race ○ The Chicano men fought for racial inequality but suppressed the  Chicano women ○ ‘Chicano movement’ versus ‘The Women’s Liberation movement’ (White Feminist Movement) ■ The 2 groups had elements that  intersected → Chicana feminist group ■ Examining intersection right now ○ Chicano movement: wage inequality, civil rights ■ Women’s rights were often pushed aside because  they were not that ‘important’ ○ This is in the era → many feminists are pushing for  birth control rights ○ Issue: should there be a mandatory waiting period of 72 hours  before a tubal ligation is performed? ■ Waiting period helps give people time to think over  the decision ■ Translation ■ Thinks with a clear head ■ Procedure is described clearly ■ Intersectionality: Kimberle Crenshaw ● Columbia University Law School ○ Counter hegemony → suing the hospitalDOC 2 - Gagnon “The only freedom which deserves the name is that of pursuing our own  good, in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to deprive others of  theirs; or impede their efforts to obtain it.” --John Stuart Mill ● He was a British intelligent scholar who wrote a lot about  Liberalism and Utilitarianism ● Utilitarianism: ○ It is alright to seek to benefit yourself so long as you  don’t keep others from doing so ○ As long as we do not interfere, it’s ok ○ Freedom (his definition) = the ability to make your  own choices and do what you want ○ Tried to recast utilitarianism in a more humane way ○ Conscious decision → “attempt” ■ Loophole: can you hurt others  unconsciously? ○ Systems of society can collectively take away  freedom ■ Not only individualistic ■ People unconsciously participate ○ Individual rights vs society ■ Collective goal of society: prevent  repopulation of Latino families (overpopulation) ○ Labels ■ Illegal ■ Breeders ■ non-English speaking ■ Welfare ■ “Welfare Queens” → any women of color  that had a lot of children ● Huge clash in the Feminist  movement ○ Split into 2 large  groups ■ Politic al  ■ Radic al  ● H urt the movement● T hey wrote articles about their  cause ● “ All heterosexual sex = rape” ● L esbians ● “ All Feminists hate men” ○ Individual rights: to make their own choice  (reproductive choices), accessibility (access to readable  pamphlets), waiting period ○ Waiting period → produced tension within Feminist  Movement ■ Feminists wanted it now ● Historical context ○ Tie in with the argument ● Introductions shouldn’t be dry ○ Make the reader feel invested ○ Don’t throw in too many DOC terms ● Creative title ● Informed consent Lecture ● Paper #2: Analyzing the fight for healthcare ○ On website ● Anna Nieto Gomez, 1974 ● DOC 1 Reader, pg 188 ○ Use this ● Angela Davis ○ Graduate student and participant in creation of  UCSD’s “Third College” ● “Women’s desire to control their reproductive system is probably  as old as human history itself” (Female control within patriarchal  systems) ● One side- push to challenge patriarchy ○ (individual right to birth control) (Johnson 34) ○ More about individual rights that societal rights ○ Dismantling patriarchy → dismantling control● Border Patrol Game ○ Representational obstacle ■ Negative images associated with illegal  immigrants (Mexican) ■ Capitalizing on white supremacist ideas ■ Perpetuating ideologies/stereotypes ■ Allowed in society because it’s a ‘joke’ ● Don’t take it seriously ○ People portrayed in the caricatures ■ Smiling ■ As if they’re crossing the border for fun ○ Ideologies persist in the present ○ Paradigm ● Unnatural Causes: Not Just a Paycheck ○ Third film on healthcare system ○ Analysis of growing wealth divide in American since  the 1980s ○ Is inequality making us sick ○ Electrolux ○ Wage inequality between races ○ Richard Price ■ Studied the effect of job loss on people’s  healths ■ People don’t usually recover ■ This includes moving to other countries  to work ■ Walk-ins in the ERs increas ○ Whitehall study ■ Cortisol, adrenaline, epinephrine  pathways ■ Illnesses involving alcohol ■ Excess deathsDOC 2 - Gagnon Discussion ● Freewrite about the film: ○ Unemployment leads to stress, which leads to major  health problems, especially chronic health issues (didn’t know before) ○ Huge disparity between salary for Americans versus  salary for Mexicans ○ Self-fulfilling hierarchy in society itself? ○ Relate to the election cycle ■ People living in rural areas who lost their jobs were ignored ■ Emotionally invested ● Backbone of essay 2: Justice and the Common Good ○ Individualism versus the public good ○ Neoliberalism ○ Look for tensions and contradictions ○ Public good: what’s best for the majority ■ Instituting recycling policies ■ Accessible public schools ■ Public health ○ Obama versus Kennedy (religious views) ○ Does religion belong in politics? ■ Each individual should be free to choose his  or her perspective of life ■ Put public good over our own tendencies and thoughts and beliefs ■ Religion shapes your morals so we need  religion ■ Religion can be used in propaganda ■ Foner article gives HISTORICAL CONTEXT ○ Make an emotional hook and introduction ○ INDIVIDUALISM: rights, morals, pursuit of happiness ● Common good: collective action, public safety, utilitarianism, dominant ideology, intersectionality ● Instead of using the word notion, use a direct and more powerful word ● Use direct and powerful language Lecture ● Unnatural Causes: Not Just a Paycheck ○ 2 stories of what happens (2006) when a major  corporation (Electrolux) closes its plant and moves overseas  (outsourcing)○ How does a corporation understand the role in people’s  lives that it plays? ○ Wealth gap is widening ○ CEO salary is greater than 250 times a worker’s pay ○ Money always goes to the top and fails to trickle down ○ Where you stand on the economic ladder can predict your overall health ○ Costs and benefits for unemployed people ● From Michigan to Sweden ○ Compare and contrast the two Electrolux stories ■ US: focus on individualism ■ Sweden: shared social responsibility ■ Cultural differences ○ Why do the workers in Greenville, MI, suffer from such a  different fate than their counterparts in Vastervik, Sweden? ● US: people complain more ● Sweden: more optimistic ○ Conditions manifest hope or hopelessness ● Individualism gone too far? ○ Negative consequence ○ Leads to a problem with democracy ● Connections between Sandel and the film ○ “Unemployment is very bad for individualism. You lose  your connection in society, you lose your democratic empowerment,  but you also suffer when it comes to health. And that creates of course, another discussion because it is a waste of resources to let people be  laid off for long periods of time, or unemployed for long periods of  time. But it also costs even more if you don’t do anything” --Thomas  Ostros (Ministry of Industry, Sweden) ○ Only mentions how it will harm the public good ○ How does involuntary unemployment affect your  democratic empowerment?DOC 2 - Gagnon Lecture ● Justice = “The Good Life” ○ Aristotle asks, how do we create the conditions in  society for everyone to live the ‘good life’? ○ Thinking about the public good? ○ What is society’s version of the good life? ○ Are these people living the good life? ○ Economics and good life ● Rising inequality: The ‘Haves’ and ‘Have-nots’ ○ In the film, the Reverend Jerry Jones says, “There’s a  growing chasm between the haves and have-nots” ○ Wealth = something more than income ○ Wealth gap is growing ○ Detail: lose jobs → lose homes → home value goes  down → rich peopel buy as second home → filled with high-end  appliances ○ Growing trend in million dollar homes ○ Aristotle: the state exists for the sake of a good life,  and not for the sake of life only ○ What does wealth and inequality look like today? ○ Wealth = assets of value ○ Libertarian philosophy: ■ The people at the bottom are there not  because they don’t work hard, but because of other  circumstances ○ Ideologies: people at the bottom are lazy and  unintelligent ■ People at the top are smart and more  hardworking ○ Neoliberalism: personal failings are due to personal  failures ■ The government should not intervene ■ You are on your own ○ Structural roadblocks: ■ Health ■ Debt ■ These are both deterrent ● Competing Models of Justice○ Utilitarianism: public good = greatest happiness for  the greatest number (majority rules) ■ Blind Point: minority exploitation/treat  people as ends ■ You have to crack a few eggs to make an  omelet ○ Libertarianism - public = individual freedoms ■ Blindspot: possible greed and corruption ■ No safety nets or communal obligations ○ Civic virtue and public good = public investment in  ‘good life’ = for the sake of all ○ Sandel advocates for the third option ■ Blindspot: potentially higher taxes, less  profitDOC 2 ­ Gagnon Discussion ● Don’t go all the way back in history ○ Provide context, but only to a relevant point ○ Reader should be able to contextualize ● Define unfamiliar terms ● Don’t use hidden citations ● According to professor Gagnon at UCSD ● According to historian Sherry Boulter ● Public vs. privatization ● Hegemonic structure ● contradiction/tensions for Latinas to become mothers ● Eugenics ● Angela Davis and Johnson: patriarchal society ● Individual control versus public control ● La Femenista ● Population bomb book ● Healthcare as a right versus a privilege ● Goals of sterilization movement ● Was it resolved or not? → conclusion ● READ PROMPT Lecture ● Part of the final exam focuses on questions/notes/topics from weeks 8­10 ● Papers: a Few Final Thoughts ○ Be wary of being pulled into binary (either­or) thinking ■ Corporations vs workers ■ Doctors vs patients (doctors can also be patients) ■ Hospitals bs patients ○ Think: hospitals and patients ■ United States vs Sweden ● Film does not compare US to  Sweden ● Film compares Electrolux  outsourcing in the countries■ How did the same company approach outsourcing  in two different ways based on the systems, laws, ideologies in each  country? ■ Pg 162 ■ No oversightDOC 2 - Gagnon Discussion ● Homework for next week; ○ Wednesday: working thesis and two typed body  paragraphs ○ Friday: rough draft (2 copies) ● Foner doesn’t write about gender well ○ He doesn’t go into enough detail about it ○ Doesn’t describe everything ○ Being a Feminist is a bad thing? ■ Ideology flourished under Reagan ● Regan didn’t acknowledge the AIDS crisis ● People liked him for his grandfatherly feel ● Told Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall ● Economic policies favored businesses ● Wealth gap widened ● Good for third prompt ● Deregulation: perceived as a public good, but not really, it helped  corporations and the rich instead ● Mention the author’s name in the essay to add credibility in addition to  citing the author ● USE: names of women/doctors in the documentary ○ It reinforces the idea that Hispanic women were involved ○ The medical center was a county hospital and it was really accessible, you didn’t need to have insurance to go ● Population Bomb Theory: a book written by Paul Ehrlich and his wife  Anne Ehrlich ○ Warned of the mass starvation of humans in the 1970s  and 1980s due to overpopulation, as well as other major societal  upheavals ○ Advocated immediate action to limit population growth ● DOC 1 : Neoliberalism → deregulation/privatization of corporations →  less money goes to programs for low-income people ● Define this ● Reinforced racial and gender formation ● Keeping hierarchy (top) predominantly white ○ Paternalistic ■ Taking away another person’s rights ○ Cite stuff that’s not common knowledge ● ROSENFELD: a whistle-blower (dangerous job) ○ Path of most resistance ● Don’t redefine path of least resistance Lecture ● Wealth and health○ Why is unemployment in the US associated with higher  rates of stroke, heart and kidney disease, alcohol abuse, suicide, and  homicide? ■ High rates of unemployment ■ Stress related to cortisol levels ■ Endocrine and nervous system ■ Whitehall study ■ Higher rates of death ■ No insurance → not enough accessible  healthcare ■ Do we have an obligation to make sure that  all people have an ‘equal’ chance at a ‘healthy’ life? ■ Is this a just view of the public good? ■ Or, should we remain neutral on these  matters (individual good)? ○ Michael Sandel, “Justice and the Common Good” ■ In American history, dominant ideology is  that government should remain ‘neutral’ on matters of public  and private goods” (134) ■ ‘Government neutrality’ = letting individuals  live their lives as free as possible without interference from  government laws and regulations ■ But: Democrats and Republicans historically  differ on how to create ‘neutrality’ (especially since the 1980s) ● Republican View Since the 1970s ○ Economics = government should be ‘neutral’ by staying  out of economics almost entirely (Sandel 135) ■ Libertarian view of justice (let free market  maximize choice and freedom) ○ Market Morality = most moral system is supply and  demand ■ Neutral toward wealth and inequality gaps ● Examples of policy: privatization and deregulation, anti-labor unions,  reduction of taxes and public programs, free trade (lack of taxes between  countries), outsourcing etc. (Foner) ● 2006: George Bush → Republican Congress ○ Mexico at this time did not have strong labor unions ● PAGE 149 ● NAFTA allowed the move (signed in 1994) in addition to many other  factors ● Page 136 ● Social policy = government should be ‘active’ and ‘virtuous’ - NOT  NEUTRAL ○ virtue- based, Christian moral justice ○ Christian based restriction on LGBTQ, ‘family values’,  gender roles, school prayers, reproductive rightsDOC 2 - Gagnon Lecture ● This week: ○ Monday: Merchants of Doubt (on reserve) ○ Wednesday: Oreskes, Merchants of Doubt ○ Friday: Finishing Chavez and lopez on pesticides ○ DON’T READ: Native American Pipeline Resistance ○ Page 169 ■ Bottom of page → full citation ■ Disagreement on humans causing  climate change ● Merchants of Doubt: ○ A merchant is a person who sells things ○ How do they sell doubt and how do they profit from  it? ● Jamy Ian Swiss ○ Magicians are honest liars ○ Makes an honest living ○ Fool people, distort their perception of reality ● Climate change is a myth ○ Cigarettes cause cancer? ■ Political statements, not scientific  statements ○ Stanton Glantz ■ Tobacco ● Everyone smoked ○ Trend ○ People smoked in the hospital ○ There’s nothing  wrong with smoking in the workplace ○ Scientists: powerful, rich ○ Tobacco companies knew smoking caused cancer  and heart disease but tried to hide this ● Nicotine was addictive but people said the opposite ● ‘It may be harmful, it may not be’ ○ Ambiguous ○ ‘Anything can be harmful’ ● Doubt is our product → public relations firm helped the industry  leaders ● 1958: smoking is known to cause cancer ● 1963: smoking → heart disease ● Tension: entrepreneur offers harmful products to customers to  earn profit● Strategy is to fool the customers? ○ Hide info from customers ○ Pretend evidence doesn’t exist ● Doubt allows companies to profit ● Tension between research and how much customers believe the  research ● Flame retardants ○ In furniture ○ Chemicals in foam come out and into our bodies ○ Kids are the most vulnerable ○ Do they really protect us from fire? ■ No they don’t actually do anything ○ People died of putting out cigarettes in houses →  starts fire ○ Scapegoat: the furniture wasn’t fireproof → shifts  blame ○ Third party defender: firefighters ○ A ‘spy’ would get paid $200 an hour to talk to  firefighters and convince them that the furniture was causing the fires, not cigarettes ● People use science to drive political agendas ● James Hansen ○ 1988: scientists are not good at communication ■ Excuse ○ Greenhouse effect is a reality ○ More pollution can be good? ■ Meaning is manipulated ○ Refusal to change ○ Tired to make it look beneficial ● Naomi Oreskes ○ ‘Global climate change’ ■ How many disagreed ■ Scientific consensus ● She was attacked by others ○ Called  Communist ○ Same people who don’t believe in climate changeDOC 2 ­ Gagnon Lecture ● Part of final exam focuses on questions/notes/topics from weeks 8­10 ● Read, annotate ● Republican View since the 1970s ○ Economics = Libertarian view of justice (let free market maximize  choice and freedom) ○ Respect individual choices ■ Reaganomics ■ Healthcare = not a right, a privilege (if you can  afford it) ■ Pursue market solutions to problems (no  regulations) ○ Examples of policy: privatization, and deregulation, anti­labor  unions, reduction of taxes ● Democrat View Since the 1970s ○ Economics = government should create conditions of economic  fairness through regulation ○ Attempts to ‘level playing field’ (Sandel 138) ○ Active government (Keynesianism) in the economy ○ Examples of policy: pro­labor unions, environmental and  economic regulations, public programs, racial equality programs ● BUT: like Republican views, increasingly in favor of privatization, free trade, and outsourcing since the 1990s (NAFTA) ● Page 167 ● Page 166 ○ Right column ○ Lower a little → public good ● Countercultural ● Tensions and contradictions → page 166 → 2nd to last paragraph ● Trick down, but it is actually trickle0up ● Who’s interested in preserving the status quo and who wants to change it? ● Does healthcare depend on the amount of sick people and how sick they get? ● Page 5DOC 2 ­ Gagnon Discussion ● Concept map ● Higher level of education → you see more nuance and grey area ● Shutting people down for facts, not opinions ○ Should be respectful Lecture ● From the poll, it seems that people view climate change as a political matter ● Not everyone thinks that it’s a big problem ● Individualism: how will I be affected versus how will everyone else be affected ● <50% climate change is due to human activity The Example of Ben Santer ● Why does the reading begin with the example of Ben Santer? ● What do the authors hope to show in the example of Ben Santer? ● The Historical Context ○ Two questions in the 1980s and 1990s ■ How did scientists such as Ben Santer know that  global warming changes were underway? ● People thought that global warming  was because of the sun and how the sun was warming up the earth ■ How did they know (these changes) were caused by human intervention? ○ TENSION: ■ If it’s caused by humans, we should do something  about it ■ If not, then we can’t do anything about it Significance of the Santer example ● Shows three things ○ The importance of peer­reviewed, scientific research ○ The ethical and possibly unethical works of scientists and the  public communities they serve ○ The complex role of scientists, media, politicians, and corporations in educating the public The Work of Rocket Scientists ● Fred Singer and Fred Seitz (173­174) ● Cold War Era rocket scientists that lend significant credibility to the ‘doubt’  surrounding global warming ● Deeply suspicious of scientist and communist practices that would undermine  free­market capitalist ideas ● The reading and the film attempt to expose and challenge their work● How? ● Are these efforts successful? ● Singer and Seitz promote the skeptic view on climate change ○ Attacks scientists and others in areas in which he has no expertise  in ● Politics: anti­Communist ● Climate change policies → slippery slope to Socialism? ● Watermelons → green on the outside, red on the inside ○ Direct reference to Cold War terminology ● Pinkies: people who sympathized with Communists The Historical Tension ● Private profit, free­enterprise in the capitalist system vs. health and safety of  people and the planet itself ● What’s best for the public good? ● The word ‘global warming’ is too negative, ideological ○ ‘Climate change’ is more neutral and gentle ● Different sides of the debate Global Warming Debates ● One debate = does it exist? Is it caused by humans? Can we trust science? ● Second debate: what are the best courses of action? How should we approach this  as a society?

Page Expired
It looks like your free minutes have expired! Lucky for you we have all the content you need, just sign up here