Thomas Humphrey is best known for his works on citizenship (1950) despite his early retirement from the field of academic research. Stemming from post World War II, his study of citizenship revolved around the rights and responsibilities bestowed on those who possessed full membership in a nation state. Marshall states that the elements of this membership are broken down into three areas which have developed chronilogically over centuries. He believed that civil rights came first which proposed to ensure freedom of speech, thought and faith, liberty of the person, the right to own property, to conclude valid contracts and the right to justice. Due to this movement towards individual rights, all other categories of rights would follow. Political …show more content…
The mobilisation of the working class and the amelioration of the working class sparked a ripple effect in terms of the rights of citizenship. Turner (2009) states that this is the core of Marshall's theory. The welfare services that emerged due to the amelioration of the conditions of the working class were key in the restructuring of the rights of citizens to adjust to the expanding capitalist system. Social institutions such as the education system provided a gateway to engage in the other areas of citizenship such as the political sphere as one needed to be educated in order to participate or stand for election. The previous consensus of elitist figures' exclusivity in the political arena was no longer the only option and the engagement of the working class in politics directly impacted the role of citizenship in the nation state. Other social institutions such as the courts of justice were also developed for the everyday man. However, Turner also states that capitalism and citizenship provides a contradictory relationship as citizenship is a status position that mitigates the negative effects of social class position with capitalist society. He notes that status entitlement can become a cause of status inequality and this is in particular an area which Marshall did not address in his theory of citizenship. As a framework, the three elements of Marshall's theory appear to be a utopian like structure but it must be noted that Marshall centered his citizenship theory around the majority of society and failed to include minorities and women in his thinking. The rights of citizenship, due to their involvement in capitalism were mainly directed at men and women an afterthought. The same can be said in relation to minorities but it is necessary to remind ourselves of the period in which Marshall concluded his
In 1924 US congress passed the Johnson-Reed act. This act reduced the amount of immigrants coming to the US from any other country to a mere 2%. Many thought this act was unjust and consequently, “un-american”. One man, Robert H. Clancy, a Republican congressman from Detroit, stood up for those being oppressed by this act. Mr. Clancy states his points in the 1924 speech “An “Un-American Bill” through the use of diction, a myriad of anecdotes, and a motley of pathos.
In doing so, Semley calls into question what it means to be “free and French,” as Touissant Louverture famously said while delivering his Constitution in Le Cap in 1801. Citizenship is more than legal rights and the cultural aspect is just as meritorious as any legal procedure. Semley’s book follows a roughly chronological outline of events in the French empire, using case studies on different figures and groups of people in different areas of the empire. Semley weaves together a cohesive narrative by connecting the individuals and places in these stories to create a cascading effect that makes it easy to understand the gradual evolution of citizenship and its relationship to people of color.
In William Brennan’s view on the American Constitution he focused on human dignity to determine his interpretation. As he states in his essay, “But we are an aspiring people, a people with faith in progress. Our amended Constitution is the lodestar for our aspirations. Like every text worth reading, it is not crystalline.” (Brennan).
He also believed we are entitled to equal justice, religious and political freedoms, peace, honest friendships, and the right of election. This tells us that Jefferson’s beliefs in the importance of personal freedoms and individual rights was genuine and sincere. Surely, without access to our freedoms and rights, we would have an unhappy nation. With an unhappy nation might spawn rivalry from the people against the government. Jefferson avoids this by promising liberty to the people.
This notion oftentimes can enable yet inhibit the system simultaneously, but nonetheless his ideologies have fallen on the side of conservatism. Halliburton noted in his book about Thomas’ life that “the fact that he is a conservative African American makes Thomas different and strangely alone” (88) and “is also the most closely watched” (88). Halliburton’s statements may or may not be true but the fact remains the same that his decisions and opinions on court cases are expected to be a reflection of his party affiliation especially when it comes to the interpretation of the constitution, particularly in this case the fourth amendment. Because of this Thomas must weigh party ideas with his own interpretation of the constitution which at points in his career caused opposition from other politicians mainly in instances when his interpretation seemed extreme and/or
Author Barbara Welke, professor of history and law at the University of Minnesota in her book, Law and the Borders of Belonging in the Long Nineteenth Century United States, has compiled a well thought-out and comprehensive book towards the discussion of law and the construction of borders within the United States. Welke sheds light on issues concerning discrimination of women, racialized others, and disabled people within the terms of how the legal borders of belonging have constructed that discrimination. The author also focuses on the ideal individual during the long nineteenth century, as the dominant ideology of a person was to be male, white, and able. Within this context, Welke presents various legal cases and practices to create a foundation
The late eighteenth century was a time filled with much government reform throughout America with the creation of vital documents such as the Articles of Confederation, the Declaration of Independence, and the Bill of Rights. Through a few centuries of buffer, it is often forgotten what some of these political changes are meant to revise. Some of these changes, like ones found in the Constitution, have proven extremely helpful in the molding of the nation we live in today, changes such as the Privileges and Immunities clause. The Privileges and Immunities clause is one clause meant to protect the rights of individuals by guarding their personal rights while in the different states of the country. The Privileges and Immunities clause is found in Article IV Section 2 of the Constitution and it states, “The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.”
Huthmacher conveys that liberalism of Americans made the type of political system they were wanting. He asserted that the government got involved because of how the lower class portrayed their rights and voted for legislation. The low class was looking for improvement for working conditions. He provided job security, better wages and working conditions, and gave some benefits of production to consumers. “As a result, we find urban lower-class representatives introducing a large variety of business regulatory measures on the local and state levels during the Progressive Era”(Huthmacher 13).
Throughout the early 19th century, changing politics and an evolving society in America impacted all classes of people, specifically the white working class. Jacksonian Democratic ideals was influenced by the working class, and the white working class benefited from President Jackson’s decisions. During the year of Jackson’s presidential election, the Workies, which consisted of working men, wanted to protect individuals who earned money from arduous labor, but failed to make payments punctually. Jacksonian Democrats realized the Workies language was valuable in the fact that beliefs of the Workies group echoed through Jackson’s party.
These conditions led to the creation of radical movements such as Unions (e.g Knights of Labor, National Labor Union, American Federation of Labor etc.,) and third political parties(e.g. Socialist Party, Populist Party etc.) These radical movements sought to improve the lives of the working class and
As this promoted the balance in labor and the growth of a greater community. Each member was choose to do whatever work they found most appealing and all were paid equally. Hence, this shows that the ideals that these movements were fighting for were heard by the people and Congress, as result it became nationally known
In the face of power of big business and the face of the federal government, the laboring-class Americans attempted to better their lives. The laboring-class did that by improving work conditions, decreasing poverty, and trying to get increased government interactions. The laboring-class attempted to improve working conditions. Working conditions were very poor.
In, “Not Just (Any) Body Can Be a Citizen”, author M. Jacqui Alexander explores, examines and expounds on the socio-political forces and machinations which have influenced the legislation in Trinidad and Tobago and The Bahamas, regarding specific sexual identities and manifestations. Primarily using the laws of both countries pertaining to sexual offenses, she discusses how homosexuality and other non-reproductive sexual acts and lifestyles have been outlawed in both nations. In her argument, she outlines how persons of such alternative lifestyles (including herself) have been carefully constructed as deviant, immoral and ultimately destructive to the moral and social fiber of the country. They are counterproductive to the state-imagined heteronormative, civilized state and, as such, must be criminalized and prohibited from enacting such “unnatural” behavior within the general society. More specifically, however,
Andrew Jackson believed that he was a guardian of the Constitution .He was fixing the faulty interpretation of the constitution put forth by his fellow congress men. Jackson saw the banks as “monopoly of foreign and domestic exchange” he believed the wealthy people were using the banks to line their pockets with more money. One of Jackson’s opponents, Daniel Webster of Mass. . He believed that Jackson had no true facts on his assessment, in fact he saw the veto as alarming. In westers view, Jackson was using the constitutional argument to support his own grab for power.
Question 1. What do you make of Karl Marx’s contributions to sociology? Answer: It would take volumes to describe how important Karl Marx’s work is in sociology. His work is important in the 21st century because his concepts and ideas are the only genuine seeds for a better society.