Exam #2 Flashcards
Dialectical materialism
Means and relations of production
Epiphenominalism
Base vs. Superstructure
Instrumentalism
Whose interests does the state serve?
Instrumentalism
“…the State is the form in which the individuals of a ruling class assert their common interests…”
Marx, The German Ideology
“The executive of the modern State is but a committee for managing the common affairs of the whole bourgeoisie.”
Marx and Engels, Communist Manifesto
Class
Differences from Weber?
Proletariat and Bourgeoisie
Class in itself vs Class for itself
Class consciousness (vs. False consciousness)
Labor Theory of value
Absolute vs. relative surplus value
Lochner v. New York
New York’s Bakeshop Act - employers cannot require bakers to work more than 10 hours a day or 60 hours a week
Law was overturned - people can decide how long and when to work
Split Labor Markets
Two groups of workers whose price for labor differ for the same work
Split labor markets: Price determinants of labor
Standard of living
Information
Political resources
Split labor markets: Motives
“Target Earners”
Supplementary earners
The Players: Business
Goal: cheap, docile workforce
Use cheap labor as leverage against expensive labor
The Players: Lower-paid labor
Goal: Make $$
Politically weak, easily manipulated by business
The Players: Higher-paid labor
Goal: eliminate or neutralize threat
Threatened by lower-paid labor
“Neutralization”: Exclusion
Cheaper labor resides outside the country
Higher-paid “native” labor restricts their entry
“Neutralization”: Exlusivity (“caste”)
Occurs when low-paid labor cannot be excluded
“Aristocracy of labor”
Aristocracy of labor
Monopolization of valued jobs
Restricted access to education and training
Weaken low-wage group politically
Split labor markets
Business supports free market competition
Leads low-paid labor to displace high-paid labor
High-paid labor able to asset its prerogatives against both low-paid labor and business interests
Marxism
Business engages in “divide and conquer” tactics
Uses low-paid labor to undercut high-paid labor
Encourages racial antagonism as “falls consciousness” to prevent worker solidarity
Slavery: Pre-1808
Slaveholders exonerated for killing slaves
Fear of losing liberty vs. fear of losing life
Slavery: Post-1808
End of the trans-Atlantic slave trade
Depended on natural reproduction
Territorial and agricultural expansion
“Neutralization” in the North - Exclusion: Indiana Constitution (1851)
“No negro or mulatto shall come into, or settle in, the State”
“Neutralization” in the North - Exclusion: Illinois “Black Law” (1853)
Prohibited black immigration into the state
Theories of race relations: Marxism
Racial caste system in the antebellum South
Paternalistic race relations
Black codes of the immediate postbellum era
Theories of race relations: Split labor market
Laws restricting black competition in antebellum North
Rise of Jim Crow segregation in the South
Reinforced by ideology of biological racism
Jim Crow laws 1880s-1964
Intense competition between white and black workers
Denied voting rights to African Americans
Legalized segregation
1887: Florida
1888: Mississippi
1889: Texas
1890: Louisiana
1891: Alabama, Arkansas, Kentucky, Georgia
Marxism theory of race relation
Capitalist class was NOT responsible for segregation during the industrial era
Split Labor Market theory of race relation
Efforts to exclude blacks arose out of the white working class Capitalists encouraged free market competition between black and white labor
Mobility: Circulation
“Zero sum” (fixed number of positions)
Replacement and reshuffling
Mobility: Structural
Economic expansion or contraction
Job creation or losses
Decentralization
The “suburbanization” of businesses
De-industrialization
Shift in production from goods to services
Relocation
Manufacturing jobs move offshore
Automation
“Technological unemployment”
Paradox of unionization: Early industrial
Unions bad for blacks
Exclusionary
Paradox of unionization: Late industrial
Unions better for blacks
Egalitarianism
Paradox of unionization: Post-industrial
Unions good for a few, bad for the masses
Unintended consequences
Working-class barriers to corporate jobs
Relocation
Education
Unionization
Middle-class success finding white-collar jobs
Affirmative action
Government Sector
Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (1971)
Jobs requiring diplomas, credentials test scores etc must show that they are “reasonably related” to job.
White workers with higher and lower test scores showed no significant differences in job performance
“institutionalized discrimination” is unconstitutional
Disparate impact vs. disparate intent
University of California v. Bakke (1978)
UC-Davis reserved 16 places in each entering class for 100 “qualified” minorities
Allan Bakke’s GPA and test scores exceeded those of minority students that were admitted - he was rejected
Split decision
4: Any racial quota is unconstitutional
4: Use of race in admissions decisions is permissible
1: Quotas are unconstitutional, but race may be used as one factor among many
Gratz v. Bollinger (2003)
University of MI used a 150 point scale to rank applicants - 100 points needed to be admitted
Blacks, Hispanics, Indians got an automatic 20 point bonus
Perfect SAT worth 12 points
Ruled unconstitutional in a 6-3 vote
Under this system, “the diversity contributions of applicants cannot be individually assessed.”
Grutter v. Bollinger (2003)
No quota based affirmative action policy used by MI law school is constitiuional
5-4 decision in court
School benefits from a diverse student body, race may be used as a qualitative “plus” factor
