Alternative to G William Domhoffs Thesis﻿

Alternative to G William Domhoffs Thesis

12/3/2015

Hi Kids!

Please post or respond to an article that provides an alternative to G William Domhoff's thesis. You cannot use the articles I gave you in class, but you can use the same topics. Remember to include your name so you can receive credit.

Responses can include:

Things you found interesting
Areas that provide a strong counter
Areas that do not provide a strong counter (maybe someone thought an article was a strong counter, but it isn't. It's important to point this out!)
A new article that adds additional information
How you might include this article in your paper
Anything else

85 Comments

Glismarie Rivera link

12/3/2015 08:19:35 am

This disturbing article talks about a seventeen year old boy that was shot 16 times and killed by an officer. The boy's family was devastated about the murder, and they were trying to publish the video of him being shot so they can expose the police brutality in their community. The FBI and police department refused to publish it because they wanted to investigate further. However, the boy's family, just a group of ordinary citizens, convinced the city to publish the brutal video. This counters Domhoff's theory about wealthy people influencing the government because anyone can be able to advocate for themselves, you don't need money to do it.

Tania Hussain

12/4/2015 07:26:13 pm

I see where you are coming from Glismarie; however, I have to disagree with what you have to say. I myself do believe that wealthy people are not the only ones who have the power to influence the government and society. The people have the power as well. But, if you think about it, the people are depending on politicians, decision makers and the government to address their issues to others. This is because they are the ones to carry out change. The people have the ability to influence others; however, sometimes it requires people of high authority to implement these facts into action.

Christina Obuobi

12/5/2015 03:59:07 pm

Wow what a very upsetting article. I agree with you Glismarie, when a group of people come together for a certain cause money doesn't really matter. On Friday, I read an article on the social media group, 'Anonymous', and they were so interesting that I had to read more about them. A couple of days ago, these hackers leaked information on the UNFCCC to protest against the arrest of protesters in a climate March in Paris. We categorize their actions in a negative way, but that is one method that this Grass Roots Movement uses to get their point across. This connects back to the article you read because this demonstrates that you don't need money to start a movement, you just need people with a common goal by your side. This particular group doesn't use money but rather their anonymous faces and computers.

Sharmin Sultana

12/5/2015 06:22:47 pm

Glismarie, when you say that this counters Domhoff's theory, it actually doesn't, because there is actually more subtle governmental power than we actually think. When this "ordinary" family was protesting to publish the brutal video, who were they protesting towards? Definitely people with higher authority, power, and wealth. If it was self-advocacy, there wouldn't have been any need for anyone's approval, or seeking the help of FBI and police department. At the end, we are all inferior to the ones in charge, because even if someone rebels and sneaks out to a midnight party, they would go to the door and realize their parents had put millions of locks on the door and only the parents have the keys to unlock them. Likewise, we may rebel and reach the door, but people of authority eventually have the keys to open those locked doors.

Jada Rodriguez link

12/6/2015 01:47:07 pm

I agree with you Sharmin when you stated there's more subtle governmental power then we think when relating back to Domhoff's theory. I was reading articles based on recent news involved with the hacktivist group, Anonymous and they posed as a fourteen year old girl in order to catch a paedophile. Later they released a disk to police showing messages between the man and a fictional fourteen year old girl. This brings me back to what Sharmin said because anonymous does have power which people fear of, but they also want to be heard from society and law enforcements. Anonymous wants to influence society and make a change, but in order for their activities to play out, they must be heard from people with high authority.

Nuhirath Rafthia

12/9/2015 06:56:29 am

You make a very powerful point, Sharmin. Yes, when individuals with lower authority rebel and protest, they try to reach the higher authority so that a change could be made. However, if you think about it, if enough individuals with lower authority rebel and protest, they can overpower the higher authority in number. In that case, what other option does the higher authority have than to adhere to the lower authority? A single individual of higher authority most certainly does have more power, and one individual of lower authority is not enough to speak against the individual of higher authority. This does show that more power is focused on the higher authorities. However, power can be spread to the lower authorities if they gather up in number.

Shristi Lamsal

12/6/2015 08:45:33 pm

I agree with Glismarie because I do believe that this article showed the power of ordinary citizens. And I disagree with Tania because she said that we depend on politicians but that's not true. If that family had posted the video, that would have grabbed everyone's attention, people would have protest for the family. If many ordinary citizens get together, then they will more power than any other rich person. We are the one who give rich people the power to control us, and if we can give them the power, we can take it back too.

Sera Knobler

12/7/2015 04:58:11 pm

I agree with Shristi and Glismarie because it's not only people who have a great amount of wealth that can influence people's opinions, the general public can use social media to get an idea across that maybe the corporate community doesn't want everyone to see. This is similar to the chart in chapter 6 of Who Rules America where we see that the upper class/corporate community can control what the general public can see, like the news, but the general public can also use media to manipulate the higher powers.

Victoria Paleologos

12/7/2015 04:33:55 am

I agree with you Glismarie, when people get together and put their minds to something, they don't need money to get things done. However, I do think the rich have an upper hand in most cases, it's not just the money but they also have influence, both the rich and the poor have the power do get things done but the poor have to work harder at it, pressure more, and get things done in a fashion that is not really Something utilized by the rich. For the rich change can be a phone call away, for the poor it might take force, death, shouts, protests and marches that take time and effort to organize. Further more, many of the poor don't realize the power they have as citizens, and the change they can bring about, ignorance allows the rich to get away with things the most, second comes influence then money. People also forget that we are all just people in the end, and people rule people, in that sense we are all equal, there is no person more human than the other. Ideologies and policies are implemented by people and so only people can overrule them.

Elani Hillman

12/7/2015 06:37:50 am

I think that to an extent, what you say is true. The "ignorance" of the lower and middle class is not something that arose in recent times. The lack of proper nationwide education has given upperclassman a gift that has lasted decades -- the diverted gaze of the general public. The upperclass have access to the highest levels of primary and secondary education, while all other sectors must achieve significantly higher standards of achievement in order to procure the same.

Nicole Amaral

12/7/2015 05:36:12 am

I agree with you because of the fact that if they didn't strive to get that video out there, they would have never published it. By persisting and not backing down, they were allowed to accomplish what they wanted by displaying the horrors of police brutality, and this does go against his theory because they managed to show people what really goes on with the government and what they try to hide.

Caio

12/7/2015 06:14:19 am

I actually have always found interesting at the efforts that people as groups go through once they want something. Which is what should be happening, and if people want to push towards something they should work tirelessly towards it, but it's hard to imagine, even when looking st historical moments such as the civil rights movement and other war movements, how hard they are willing to work towards it. That's a great rebuttal to the book's thesis of white wealthy corporation ruling America, but this also supports the idea of the great difficulties people must go as a group, instead of having financial influence like corporations.

Gregory Wong

12/7/2015 03:23:37 pm

I also agree with this. For example in class we read an article about how people wanted GMO labeling. Despite much push back from the corporations, the people were able to get what they wanted. The people have more power than they think. I think that people tend to forget that yes the corporations occupy a huge part of the government, however they do not have full control. The Government is meant to represent us the people.

JP Amaya link

12/7/2015 07:01:22 pm

I totally agree with you Gregory. I also read Want to Know If Your Food Is Genetically Modified? And am truly marveled. For such a long time Domhoff has guided me on a fallacious belief and then I quickly came into a realization when moms pushed for the demands of GMO labeling.
"Across the country, an aggressive grassroots movement is winning support with its demands for GMO labeling." Although Corporations may seem omnipotent, voice(s) are able to wrestle with corporations and become victorious. This work of literature does provide a counterclaim for Domhoffs thesis. I also agree that corporations have full control and government is there to represent us, but what if bribery takes action upon the government would it be the voices who prevail or corporations?

Shivana Singh

12/7/2015 06:19:26 am

I agree with part of what you're saying but I disagree with the part about "you don't need money to do it" because according to Domhoff the corporate rich rules America. So basically wealthy people have more advancements than people who aren't rich. Overall I think that they shouldn't have published the video since they didn't investigate further.

Mayra

12/7/2015 07:54:46 am

I agree with you Glismarie, I thought this was very interesting. The fact that these ordinary people can create change disproves Domhoff's theory. However, I also feel that it depends on the severity of the issue at hand. If this were an issue that people believed was not as important as something else then they probably wouldn't have experienced this success and gotten the video published.

Tashee Fulmore

12/8/2015 06:34:33 pm

I see your point Glismarie,but I believe it is too vague to be a strong enough counter claim against Domhoff. This article would have to be supporting another similar article that is more obvious about its message that Corporations try to restrict what we see and are notified on.Since the article isnt really focused about corps,but actually on the case and what the past & future hold for it,its a stretch to hold this article as a main counter. The parents didnt want the video to be released,it was actually the community and therefore you can argue that the people can beat corporations, but it seems like the people are fighting against the Chicago Police Dept.,who does not want to be percieved as another racist institution and be put under fire by the public (like the NYPD and Ferguson Dept.) than an actual Corporation.In this article I dont believe the Corps play a big enough role to single them out.

Christopher Neal

12/9/2015 08:24:00 am

This relates directly to chapter 5 of Who rules America with the Opinion-Shaping Network where Domhoff lists how Corporate America influences the general public. And to Glismarie's point, money is not the only source of information the general public is. By raising this point we as the general public are indeed fighting back against the corporate community by showing that they cannot limit all information from us.

Emani McDowell link

12/3/2015 08:37:15 am

Domhoff believes that the corporate rich rules America, but other sources can serve as a counter to this belief. According to the Huffington Post as a result of Occupy Wall Street "a young woman in Seattle... had mobilized first as a local Occupy organizer, [became] elected to city council." This is an example of someone who was motivated by the movement, and "outsiders trying to have a voice in our political system." This serves as a counter for Domhoff's thesis because it shows you that the people do have a voice, and can use it to their advantage. This is interesting because it shows you that when the people are unhappy about something they have the ability to take steps to change what they don't like.

Divena Nanpersaud

12/7/2015 06:20:57 am

I agree with this in the fact that the people do have a voice and if they feel a certain way about something they should speak up because they can get their way.

Justin hall link

12/3/2015 02:04:44 pm

I found this article deeply disturbing. Not only does it go in debt about the shooting, it has a calendar that shows all the shooting that took place in 2015

Justin hall

12/3/2015 02:26:09 pm

this counters Domhoff's thesis of who rules america because there is a lot of outrage due to all of the shootings. There is so much protest about gun regulation laws and how it should be harder to get a gun. politicians, especially who are running for president are striving to change the gun laws in order to appeal to the people.All in all, corporations have a lot of money however, it is the people who help influence law regulations hence, making them rule america.

Alexandria J. link

12/3/2015 05:08:26 pm

I would say that the wealthy do not always rule the United States "since the preferences of ordinary citizens tend to be positively correlated with the preferences of economic elites, ordinary citizens often win the policies they want, even if they are more or less coincidental beneficiaries rather than causes of the victory." The top one percent have a larger impact on the country and what goings on in politics, they are often backing the same things as the other classes, so in some ways they are helping the other classes achieve a main goal.

Nicholas Paleologos link

12/7/2015 08:30:17 am

The article that I attached to this response actually demonstrates the correlation between the statistically predicted probability of inducing change and the preferences of each class (or percentile) of the national population. Unsurprisingly, yet contrary to your response, the relationship shows that federal actions are most reflective of the rich's preferences. However, and perhaps a little more interesting, the deviation gets larger and larger once we continue to go down in socioeconomic status and the predicted probability of their preferences becoming represented. In other words, the 90th percentile, seemingly, has a very scarce influence on political decisions, especially when compared to the rich's influence. But, when the probability was compared to the 50th percentile (middle class?), the representation in their preferences increased dramatically. This emphasizes the power of the middle class, ensuring that political change would have to come from within the middle class before it does from lower socioeconomic statuses. The power in numbers is evident here, but it still doesn't overpower that of the rich (at least the majority of times in American history, which is what the statistics also take into account).

Celestine C Richardson

12/3/2015 08:43:27 pm

My topic is gun laws and I came across this article saying that gun laws should be more strict. This also relates to who rules America is corporate,and wealthy. In the process of make laws is based on the government. Back to the point, The interesting part in the article was that they took people to vote about how gun laws should be regulated. This was an result of the shooting in San Bernardino Cailf. Some people said have the mentally ill checked and anyone who had to past criminal record. I can disagree a few things that I believe even just anyone could use a gun to kill no matter doesn't all have to be in the record. For example something who doesn't have a criminal record and not mentally ill shot someone. Its really a tough issue because I think people don't know when a person having a gun use it wisely (safe) or cause harm.

Jessica Gamble link

12/4/2015 01:30:30 pm

I found my article extremely interesting. This huge debate about whether or not the FDA Should label Genetically Modified Foods is depressing. In the public's perspective: they should be able to identify if a product is a GMO. However, I also understand the producers concerns. Considering the North isn't a natural place to grow food because of the weather; they needed to figure out a way to detach (sort of) from the South. If they label the product as a GMO, they will lose a lot of money(from customers) and have less food growth. Don't be mistaken, I side with the public! This is a counter to Domhoffs thesis because since the majority of the public is against GMOs, this issue isn't going to subside anytime soon. This is a problem for producers who want to contain as much opposition as possible. Overall, the debate on GMOs is an issue occurring today. Since our technology is only getting better, we are capable of creating "faster" ways of doing things. As normal however, this doesn't appeal to everyone, causing disagreements.

Jerry Balbuena link

12/6/2015 03:59:35 pm

I also read an article relating back to the GMO controversy. I understand both sides of the arguments but I think the argument of the general public is much stronger because they should have the right to know what is contained in their product. Despite facing difficulty by a bill that hindered their progress, they are still gradually making change. This is a counter to Domhoffs thesis because the general public challenges the governments policies. As an example the state of Vermont is expected to sign a bill requiring the labeling of GMO. This bill exemplifies the gradual yet effective change that will be handled on a state to state basis. It further shows that the people also have a sense of power when they go against the government.

Jessica gamble link

12/4/2015 01:36:55 pm

Forgot to mention: This is also a counter to Domhoff's thesis because when the public doesn't agree on something the government is doing, they are the ones to make that change. Even if it is gradual, the change will come eventually to eliminate all the opposition.

Tasmia Hussain

12/4/2015 07:57:22 pm

I feel like what's interesting is that even though the people have a voice in society it is not always taken into consideration. But if they are heard, they will often need the guidance from the Federal gov't to make changes happen.

Nusrat Islam

12/6/2015 11:50:09 pm

I agree with you. I believe that Domhoff's thesis of his book is that corporations (the rich) rule America. They are the ones to make rules and changes for us. This is a counter because in this article it shows how the public is using their voice to make a change. This is significant because it shows how popularity in one argument can make changes to our economy

Cierra Bakhsh link

12/4/2015 06:33:38 pm

This article basically sums up what Occupy Wall Street is - which was a social movement to bring attention to the enormous income gap. This movement directly poses a conflict to Domhoff's thesis because the general public brought attention to how corporations have political power, managed to raise the minimum wage to $15, reshaped environmental movements, and much more. This movement counters Domhoff's thesis because it demonstrates that the general public DOES have the ability to change and manipulate policies - but only with protests and serious attention.

Nabil Khan link

12/5/2015 05:14:38 pm

Very similar to what I read. I read about the Black Lives Matter movement and that's basically a mass movement to put an end on police brutality. Also just like how the people involved in Occupy Wall Street, one of the main goals of Black Lives Matter is to get their voice to be heard not just around social media but to government so they can really put an end to the mistreatment of citizens by those few policemen. This goes against Domhoff's thesis where he says the corporate rich control the government because it is clearly shown that the people also have a big voice in our nation's future.

Omar Romero

12/6/2015 07:11:09 pm

I really found this article interesting, mainly because of how the author talked about how Occupy Wall Street was successful in more ways than it intended. For example, Occupy Wall Street's focus on corporate greed led to an anti-fracking movement - 'fracking' is basically when an oil company drills for oil in an extremely quick way, but results in massive damage to the environment. This movement to stop fracking prompted some regulations on fracking, which greatly minimized its damage. Anti-fracking also shows how Occupy Wall Street has helped other movements, such as environmental safety ones, to gain traction.

Laura Sanchez

12/9/2015 07:12:48 pm

I also read the Occupy Wall Street article. I agree with you Cierra, this article does counteract Bomhoff's thesis because in this article we can see how these people who fought for changes, in a way got what they wanted. For example, the higher wages on fast food workers are being placed and this is something they've been advocating for. The author of this article also mentions how there are political debates right now going on about income inequality and people demanding a change, it's like the trend, the main thing. And towards the end the author mentions that "real change comes when people demand it." I agree with this statement completely because when people unite and advocate fight for their rights they seem to captivate the governments attention and it's something great because it later on leads to a change. So yes, the public is extremely influential, they have too much power over government influence.

Diya Patel link

12/5/2015 10:03:19 am

This article demonstrated the rise of students at Hamilton College Campus in New York. The campus constitutes of mainly white and to counter these racial tensions a student group has been formed called "The Movement." The students were fed up with the lack of students and faculty of color. They also demand to hire a president of color to succeed their current president. There demands and actions have stirred a lot of movement in the college and alerted the administration to allow for more a diverse community. This is significant because it shows how ordinary, young students gained power because of their communal support and common belief. These students lack wealth and fame but have still gained enough power to stir a movement and change in their community,

Ms Waller

12/5/2015 11:53:08 am

Nice! Thanks Diya! Maybe we can add some additional student movements to this thread? Universities have historically acted as an important site for change and calls to action!

Bao Nguyen link

12/6/2015 09:50:20 am

I really find the topic of student movements. Students are a part of the general public. Students just like us care about what is happening around us because current events have a big impact on us. This article shows a rally on UC Berkeley campus due to the race issue at University of Missouri.

One student says: "Ain’t no power like the power of the people ‘cos the power of the people won’t stop." This is a counter narrative to Domhoff's thesis because during there has been a rise in the voice of the people; especially with the help of social media too. Corporations do not have complete control of America, especially during times of crisis. The government can not bend to their every whim and will just because the corporations want to. In times like these, where racism is a disgusting prevalent thing in our country, the government has to aid the people to simmer down the tension, thus not giving in to the corporations and the upper rich.

Nayeli Pena

12/6/2015 02:29:22 pm

Something that really caught my attention was how social media has helped these people get their ideas out. I feel like through social media, ideas spread out and expand. Also, I agree with you because in times of crisis the government is not going to pay as much attention to corporations as they would to people. This is because people actually go on riots and protest in the streets and other places. Because people take more initiative to protest about a certain problem, they are the ones most recognized, which counters Domhoff's thesis.

Kylana Laspina

12/6/2015 10:45:31 pm

University of Missouri is a great example of the general public voicing their opinions against a international issue, in this case, students, having the power to speak against these race hate crimes against the community. Despite the massive attention this movement spread to prevent inflictions upon minorities, the president refused to resign and assist in the safety of these students. Corporations may not have control over social media posts from the general public however, they do have control of broadcasting news companies in which display certain aspects of the problem and not all of the factual events of a situation. It was when the president finally agreed to resign due to donors no longer funding the football's team if he did not, that the events taking place on the campus were finally reported. I disagree with the general public having power due to the actions of the president present at the University of Missouri. Overall, the issue gained its popularity, but is the actual issue of racial subjection removed now that students and many other people have protested against this issue? Since oppression of many minorities have been embedded in our society there is no way of permanently removing it. Similarly, since the wealthy have had power over social and government influences (since the beginning of technological advances) therefore, they will continue to dominate these aspects and control the change that goes on in our society despite our ways of lashing back.

Darwin Pena

12/6/2015 04:50:56 pm

I found it very interesting how students were able to raise awareness to issues within an education institution. One popular method that makes student activism now is social media because it allows for the mobilization of students opinions nationally. This aspect allows for a counter to Domhoff's thesis because when issues are underscored through social media, it becomes easy to further fuel support. In times of social upheaval like this, the corporate community lacks the ability to influence government because the government usually has a responsibility to side with the people. .

Hazel Yaktubay

12/5/2015 12:43:27 pm

This article uses past events to further examine the question- Do Corporations Rule America?

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2014/07/do_corporations_rule_america.html

Sinead Kiernan link

12/5/2015 12:44:12 pm

In general, student led movements have been a prominent piece in history as the youth often seek change and call for action. Through universities, clubs, and now social media, the youth have been able to communicate about the change they want made. The article from The Atlantic, The Renaissance of Student Activism, highlights the efforts, and the strength, the students of universities have. As students at one university might rally and protest, or even send a simple, yet powerful, hashtag, it sparks students at other universities to do the same. For example, students in Mizzou were heard throughout the United States because of the movements and connections through media. Student movements are significant in the counter of Domhoff’s thesis because many people are getting their voices heard. Therefore, as a community, these students are voicing their opinions out about issues they feel need attention, and thus gain attention towards the issue at hand.

Tiffany Da Silva

12/5/2015 06:08:13 pm

The article from the atlantic, Black Lives Matter is similar to your article but instead of having students lead this movement its adults and students who are hoping to see a change of discrimination and have more equality. From my understanding after reading this article, this goes against Domhoff's thesis. Corporations don't rule the world in this article, the people rule the world because of social media. These days everyone has access to phones to record what's going on which then gets posted on social media which shows how the people have a say. This is significant because media and those who are protesting are trying to be heard to make a change.

Sherien

12/6/2015 06:57:23 pm

I would have to disagree with you Tiffany. I also read the same article and yes it may have seemed that the people rule America but to what extent is this really true? It has been shown in William Domhoff's book, "Who Rules America," the true process of how everything is presented to the people. Domhoff created a social-networking diagram to prove that corporations do rule America. If we think about it, at the end of the day, whatever the people say it has to lead back to corporations. There is no way of escaping this cause and effect sort system. You can start any where on Domhoff's diagram and no matter what, it will make its way back to the corporations. This would then lead to their influence and rewiring of the topic in order to show what side of the argument they truly want people to believe in. As much as the people's influence of media matters and has some what of an effect, money seems to always win at the end.

Calvin Herman link

12/5/2015 01:58:54 pm

Early this year, we discussed the struggles of fast food workers and manicurists to get by due to their low pay. The question is, what actions are they taking to increase their wages and improve their daily lives? In the article “How to Get Low-Wage Workers Into the Middle Class” by Steven Greenhouse, the author specifically examines the fast food workers, particularly McDonalds’ employees. Over the past two years, there have been strikes demanding a higher pay for fast food workers, and this strategy has proven to be successful, as it caught national attention. Greenhouse then explores the inverse relationship between the strength of unions and income inequality. Although stronger unions cause a lower income inequality, many workers refuse to be unionized for the fear of being fired, which makes it harder to create improvement. Despite the obstacle, the authority have been persuaded to raise the minimum wage. The fact that these workers’ efforts have triggered political action serves as a counterclaim to Domhoff’s thesis that it is actually possible to resist the corporations’ rule. Ultimately, this movement might “create a model for low-wage workers in other industries.”

Crystal Hernandez

12/5/2015 09:39:29 pm

I completely agree with you Calvin. I really appreciate that you brought back what we discussed in the beginning of the year because I was starting to strongly believe that Domhoff's thesis could not be countered due to the amount of emphasis and historical statistics that in a way backed him up.
When I read the Tea Party article I also still felt like Domhoff's thesis could not be countered because these Tea Party members were being represented by wealthy people. These grass roots organizations were being picked up by wealthy organizations and/or groups that sponsored their movement. However, the experience of the fast food workers and manicurists I believe is a pure example of a grass roots movement. I would also consider that unionized strikes and/or rallies also exemplify the definition of a grass roots movement because the citizens are taking matter into their own hands and refusing to work and strike for the rights they rightfully deserve. Domhoff mentions strikes and rallies as the counter to his thesis but never bothers to explain why this is so. Although I am still skeptical about whether the power in numbers is sufficient enough to control the corporate rich, I now understand that even though they in some cases might and in others might not they are responsible for the change and reform movements throughout our history. I also realized that it shouldn't matter how long these changes last. The fact that change is happening means that we are progressive although slowly developing positively as a nation.

Valerie Ngo

12/8/2015 08:07:38 am

I agree that the movement for low-wage workers to increase their wages is a counter to Domhoff's thesis. The fact that these employees are all (more or less) drawn together towards a common goal to successfully persuade a change in policy shows that corporations do not hold all the power. Much like the progressive era back in the late 1800's to early 1900's, many people came together to fight for specific goals. Although they weren't all united towards one goal, they were still able to influence the government enough to change policies over a long period of time. Now that the Fight for 15 actually has one overarching goal, people can be much more successful in changing policies. Moreover, the existence of social media, something corporations can't exactly control, allows for the message of movements to be heard, which then results in a much more influential movement for policy changes. I think we can all agree that at the end of the day, it is literally the government that holds control since they are the ones implementing the policies. When there's a social movement advocating for a policy change that might sabotage the goals of the corporate rich, the government themselves must decide whether to satisfy the public or the corporates (even though there are conservatives and corporates in congress that are conservative). This further supports the idea that the bigger the social upheaval/movement, the more likely the government will implement a change in policy (I could be wrong though). I only say this because if the movement/upheaval gets too out of hand, it can result in anarchy where everyone is rioting and being all crazy and the government definitely doesn't want that.

Sierrah Tann link

12/6/2015 06:51:27 am

In the article A Movement Has It's Moment discusses the quest for racial justice in this country. Black Lives Matter has been a movement of progress but has not yet achieved justice. The movement counters Domhoff's thesis because it gives more power to people, which Domhoff thinks should be prevented, and shouldn't be in the hands of the general public. The people apart of this movement don't necessarily have a voice only within their society. On the other hand they had the support of President Obama who defended the movement and the removal of police while protesting peacefully. I found this article interesting because the movement is something that you analyze and really question what can really be done about racial justice ? Is it more about using force to get what you want or strategizing about it. Also another beneficial aspect of this movement is that the support of the president is definitely great due to the fact that he's an authoritative figure and has more of a voice then your general public, so enforcing the movement through him is going to enlighten it and gain more support and justice.

Thalia Mercado

12/6/2015 08:25:20 am

Sierrah you really have great points here and referring to the question regarding what can really be done about racial justice I feel it's something really challenging to come up with a solution to. I feel like this is something that can't truly be completely solved if not bettered. Because people all have different mindsets and you can't really force everyone to think a certain way when it come to race or any other topic. Also, I feel like the fact that president Obama got involved, and wanted police forces to be removed is something highly noteworthy. The fact that he is a higher authorative figure is not the only thing that matters if not also that he is showing as the president that he believes in the power of the voice of the people. He believes that a change for the better should not be stopped. Connecting this to a counter to Domhoffs thesis, showing that people really can unite to try and alter something if they don't like it. Lastly, I have to respond to your question regarding the effectiveness of force or strategies to get a change to happen. I feel like using strategies is the best way to go because this causes a sense of organization and unity among the groups of people. Force will only make the people in the movement seem as chaotic. Not only that but force only makes the higher people in power really think that people can't be trusted with power in the hands.

Katelan Newman link

12/6/2015 10:08:38 am

This article is a counter to Domhoff's thesis because it clearly shows how current events (and the people's response to them) have the ability to make an impact on political elections and what politicians choose to address. The political candidates for the 2016 election are currently voicing their opinions about gun laws and regulations in a response to the December 2nd shooting in San Bernardino. I found it interesting that in a time of such extreme fear about the use of guns in our society, some political candidates like Donald Trump and Ben Carson are saying that there is no problem with the gun laws that we have now. According to the mass shooting tracker found on shootingtracker.com there have been 355 "mass shootings" (I put this in quotations because there is no official definition for “mass shooting.”) in 338 days. Regardless of the definition of "mass shootings," that's far to many shootings in just one year, add that to the amount of regular shootings that happen daily and we've got ourselves a real problem.

Katelan Newman link

12/6/2015 10:16:33 am

Also, the website shootingtracker.com itself a counter of Domhoff's thesis as well. The mere fact that people are able to make websites that clearly expose what is going on in society through the use of simplified charts that are easy to read is astonishing. Shootingtracker.com has been buzzing around the media for a a couple of days now and it's been exposing people to something that they probably wouldn't have thought of before: the cumulative amount of "mass shootings" that has happened in this year alone. When we see the numbers, we react. And the person that we react to is the government. In this way, the people have the power.

Belle Clemente

12/6/2015 03:09:08 pm

It's shocking how many shootings have actually happened this year, and especially in the light of the Paris attacks, why aren't we aware of these? Why do only some of these shootings make headlines? I can see what you mean when you say that the people have power, since one can argue that awareness equals a new kind of power. However, while the question of gun laws is floating around social media and in politics in regards to political candidates' point of views, do we really have power over the corporate rich in government? While we do have power to more accurately express views on this issue, our views still go through the aforementioned politicians. And these politicians are still ultimately under some sort of influence of the corporate donations to themselves and their campaigns. Reacting to these statistics can only do so much. At the popular level, we can try to voice these opinions to those in politics and try to vie for better gun laws, but ultimately, unless we change the roots of politics, that is, those in politics, we won't have a true say or complete power.

Victoria Collins-Yarde

12/7/2015 04:35:48 pm

I agree with you Katelan that the people have the power to influence and bring about a change. The fact that the website is exposing things that you may not hear on the news shows that the corporate rich/upper class do not have the ability to actually keep things hidden from the mass media because everyone is not watching television that much anymore they are on social media/internet. So due to the fact that people are now always on the internet it is easier to inform them about these types of things going on in society and causes for such a great uproar about situations that are occurring in our everyday lives.

Rangon Islam

12/7/2015 08:37:22 am

I agree with you because during a time of crisis people change their opinions on who should be our leader based on the candidate's opinions on how to take control of a horrible situation. For example, the Democrat candidates supported the refugees to be let in America, while the Republicans didn't. Most citizens of America would agree with the Republican candidates because they fear for their safety. Therefore, the big corporations are not the only ones in complete power. Current events play a role on changing the way people think.

Lin Li

12/6/2015 11:03:16 am

My article focus on gun control laws, and it is basically saying there should me more strict rules on guns. A lot of people wish the gun laws should be more stricter since shooting incidents happen frequently, and the recent one was shooting in California. This counters Domhuff's thesis that corporate rich rules america because the regular people always come together and protest against policies. And the government usually offers a solution to them or consider their problems. But corporate rich usually doesn't protest against polices. Therefore, the regular people have more influence in government and America.

Isatou Bah

12/6/2015 09:17:39 pm

Although I agree that gun control is a topic that really demonstrate the potentional of the people, it does not completely debunk Dumhoffs thesis. For several years, the governments has been attempting to bring policy changes regarding gun control, yet they haven't changed much. However, with the advent of many event, most of the nation wants some form of changed. This contrast in between the people's opinion and the government's actions implies that the people might not hold much power after all. Ultimately, the people that make the decisions that matter are not regular people; they are sitting in the senate. Unfortunately, even if regular people might influence them,they still make the decisions.

Jigme Dorjee

12/7/2015 06:20:06 am

I disagree because guns don't kill people, people kill people. A solution could be to restrict the buyers by checking their history. This counters Domhuff's thesis because it shows that people run America not the corporations.

Tania Pena Ortiz link

12/6/2015 01:13:54 pm

My article talks about this grass-root movement form by students of Washington University in St. Louis, among other, who are part of the environmental movement. Its one of the nation's largest environmental groups. Interestingly enough, these student are demanding the resignation of one of the board's members of trustees who owns Peabody Energy Corporation, the nation's largest coal company. Environmental groups plan to uniting to raise awareness and have some change be done. Even though their previous campaign fail, their new campaign will be backed by million of advertising displayed in TV and online. (This is a pattern we discussed in class- some may fail but revive stronger). The student say they will keep protesting until some change is done. They are hoping for legal change, a climate change legislation. They are planning to rally support when the Obama administration issues a draft that sharply limits emission of global-warning gases from existing coal-burning plants.

Benjamin Herlihy

12/6/2015 01:46:52 pm

I agree, this article does seem to go against the argument that corporations have total control over power in the United States. LIke the example you just gave there are many intances of large groups of people rising up and working together to implement a change. This is very similar to one of the most basic laws of nature: working together will always be stronger. Which means that if enough normal citizens work together they can hold the power.

Darelis Moran

12/6/2015 02:17:57 pm

This article presents a great counter claim against Domhoffs thesis because it shows that if the people were more united, big changes can be done. large sums of money can be helpful for change, but large amounts of people can get much more done.

Danilsa Lendof

12/6/2015 03:06:07 pm

I find you article that you picked to be very opposing to Domhuff's thesis. Domhuff's only seems to think that corporation are the only ones to hold power in america and have the ability to make changes in our system. The example you demonstrated goes to show how choosing an important issue that is impact the world, promoting you issues for example by advertisement, which will eventually gain you support from many people worldwide, a change can be possible. Power is not in all cases related to the upper class, power like in this example can be having the support of majority of the people to make a change.

Darelis Moran

12/6/2015 02:05:06 pm

My group was assigned to read an article that focused on anonymous, a group of internet hackers. The article talked about how the group was hacking into the Twitter accounts of members of the modern day terrorist group known as ISIS and how they were trying to come to an agreement with Twitter so that they can shut down the accounts. Although Twitter hasn't responded to the messages sent from anonymous, the hackers keep insisting on getting in contact with Twitter. This article provides a counter argument for domhuffs thesis because it demonstrates that monetary power is not the only form of power that exist. Intelligence can be another form of power because you can use it in many different ways. Anonymous might not control the world, but they have the ability of doing extraordinary things. Hacking into the accounts of the government and of terrorist group is something few people can do and something money can't do.

Darelis Moran

12/6/2015 02:12:30 pm

I forgot to mention that I found this counter argument interesting because most people have the idea that money moves the world and this argument shows that there are other things that can have lots of potential as well.

Jenny Huang

12/7/2015 08:25:09 am

I agree with Darelis because in Domhoff's research he mostly focused on the corporate community being the ruler of America. However, like the article suggests, there is more than the corporate community that has influence in the American government. Anonymous can get information about really secretive information and the government cannot stop them nor do they know who these people are.

Omoyele Okunola link

12/6/2015 02:24:43 pm

When thinking about a counter-argument to Domhoff's thesis that the corporate rich rules America and has control over the government, I immediately thought about the success of the gay rights movement. The Supreme Court ruling that favored same-sex marriage was one of the most monumental and memorable events of 2015. The article talks about how the movement for gay marriage is one of the most successful social issue campaigns in years and how other movements are hoping to replicate the model and achieve the same level of success. I believe that this article is a counter-argument to Domhoff's thesis because it shows that with time, perseverance, and growing support, a movement about an issue that was once considered ridiculous and unimportant can make history. When I think about the corporate rich, I picture conservatives that Domhoff described who are not a big fan of social change. I believe that many in the corporate community would not believe in same-sex marriage because it goes against societal norms. Therefore, I assume that they vehemently fought the legalization of same-sex marriage. However, when people unite in enormous numbers to fight for a social issue, there is little that the corporate rich can do to stop them. This is the case with the gay marriage movement as the movement's leaders and activists focused on gaining public support before they began playing a role in politics to try to change state laws. This grassroots movement began decades ago and each time it failed to see progress, it grew stronger. The strength of the LGBT community was able to influence legislature and this can happen again when we, the people, finally realize that we do have a voice and use it.

Joe Alonzo link

12/6/2015 02:41:26 pm

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/06/opinion/sunday/women-in-combat-jobs.html?&moduleDetail=section-news-2&action=click&contentCollection=Opinion®ion=Footer&module=MoreInSection&version=WhatsNext&contentID=WhatsNext&pgtype=article

This Article talks about there is opposition on the proposition from Defense Secretary Ashton Carter to open all ground combat jobs to women. The opposition comes from Senator John McCain who believes that this action will have "a consequential impact on our service members and our military’s warfighting capabilities.” McCain's statement, according to the article, reflects the ideas in which leaders from the past had about allowing African Americans to participate in the Army. Those ideas were able to be put down but the excellent performance and spirit the African American had while fighting wars. So in a way, women have the ability to have an influence in policy making and also shut people like Senator McCain up by proving that they are able to perform the many tasks that men are able to do in the military just as good if not even better than men.

Marie Verdi

12/6/2015 03:26:53 pm

Domhoff's thesis is that it is the power lies in the wealthy corporation owners who can manipulate with thei money, which gives them power. However it can be seen in an opposite lens where the people have power as well. In our article regarding GMOs in food, the whole core of the protest was founded by a group of farmers in California, who felt that GMOs should be labeled. Now while it can still be debated whether of not GMOs are dangerous or not, it can't be denied of the impact this group has made. In about two decades they have made over eighty appeals before court and some aspects of their campaign has been put in effect. In a sense, despite companies being able to have power through their money, when a group of commited people are together they are able to voice their opinions.

Anthony Naula

12/6/2015 06:45:25 pm

Domhoff's theory that the wealthy are ruling America and that none of us can change anything without their consent is not really true. In an article talking about the after effects of Occupy Wallstreet they stated that although nothing really changed after the protests, the message of inequality was still strongly present. People who were unaware before are now noticing the dangerous trend of wage gaps between themselves and "the 1%".This idea will always stay relevant as it has 2 years after the actual event and it will not be long before others pick up what they left off and continue the fight. I personally believe that people who are not rich can make change, it just takes longer for the change to happen.

Almas Redzematovic link

12/6/2015 06:57:24 pm

After reading this article, it kind of made me think about how true G William Domhoff's thesis might actually be. I believe that Domhoff's thesis is accurate, but do I support the upper class ruling America? No. Its not a matter of supporting the power elites or revolting against them. Its about what we as citizens of the United States of America, are going to do to make sure we are not being ran by white rich people. I feel like this article is going to help people understand the true idea of white supremacy and how it is out of our control to stop it.

Derek Browne

12/6/2015 07:06:47 pm

I was assigned article about the Million Mom March. This is a counter to Domhoff's thesis, power lies in the hands of wealthy corporation owners who able to influence, because these mom's were able to bring to light, the injustices of the cops towards men of color. Specifically, police brutality. In a way i saw a connection between the Million Moms March and the Million Man March because both were organized to bring about the difficulties faced in the African-American communities, as well as, racial stereotypes present in the media.

Tejaswee Neupane link

12/6/2015 07:36:38 pm

This article by Elizabeth Warren talks about how important it is for the middle class to be strong and how the middle class is the reason for why the rich stay rich. I think it is an excellent article that provides a counter to G William Domhoff's Thesis.

Tejaswee

12/6/2015 07:41:43 pm

I dont know why the website to the article did not post on my first comment but here it is http://www.huffingtonpost.com/elizabeth-warren/america-without-a-middle_b_377829.html

Divena Nanpersaud

12/7/2015 06:16:06 am

I totally agree with your point that yes without the middle class the rich wouldn't be rich because the middle class makes up the workforce, so they bring in most of the money. With a strong middle class comes a strong upper class.

Tasnim Shikder link

12/6/2015 08:24:58 pm

Tasnim Shikder

12/6/2015 08:26:54 pm

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/news/2011/12/07/10773/the-middle-class-grows-the-economy-not-the-rich-2/

Mersad Redzepagic

12/6/2015 09:33:40 pm

http://peoplestribune.org/pt-news/2014/06/corporations-vs-people-will-take-win/ This article is a great counter to Domhoff's thesis because it depicts the reality of desperation corporations are in to attempt to appeal to the people, and what the people can do in order to win against these corporations.

Erik Lazo link

12/6/2015 10:47:49 pm

It terms of grassroots movements that we were discussing in class, I believe the topic of my article is an example of such a movement. This article discusses Bernie Sanders' campaign run, and his decision to finance his campaign without the support of super PACs. In relation to grassroots movements being a sort of alternative to Domhoff's thesis, Senator's Sanders' decision to not use Super PACs serves as a grassroots movement and an alternative to the thesis because it goes against the power of influence that donation money might usually have in campaigns.

Erik Lazo

12/6/2015 10:48:45 pm

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/11/24/bernie-sanderss-rejection-of-super-pacs-is-not-universal/

Elijah Trimm-Manning link

12/7/2015 04:44:27 am

This article provides a coumter example to Dumhoff's thesis, while it also counters the counter example by placing its focus on a specific aspect of the #blacklivesmattermovement

This article is a very interesting read. "A movement with a great mass isn't effective until it has somesort of velocity towards an aspiring goal"-- Eisenburg

Jenny Fine

12/7/2015 05:18:16 am

The article I read was about how the people of the occupy wall street movement had a lasting affect on the payment of workers. Even though the desired outcome is really being seen four years later, we still see that the people made something happen. The first national outcome is when the fast food workers had their pay increase. What the people did countered Domhoff's thesis because the people in this situation had the power to change something. Domhoff states that large corporations have all the power in America but as we see her the people had all the power.

Yasmeen

12/7/2015 06:24:25 am

The article I read talked about media's role in current events. With the desire to acquire information to gain clarity of the information around them journalist and media are able to use many tools to persuade opinion. It is capable of translating the interactions between it and the events that concern individuals and so it shapes the pattern of presenting events in its publications.

Valerie Kornitchouk

12/7/2015 06:47:54 am

Domhoff illustrates the power structure in the United States by asserting that an elite class that owns and manages large income-producing properties (like banks and corporations) dominate the American power structure politically and economically. Political polarization, gerrymandering, and trusts provide some of the characteristics of our elitist society that is so corrupt. We will always have supremacy because there will always be a high claas that will be ranked highest economically and sometimes socially. Just like there will always be a group of people in penury, there always be the top 1 percent who recieve more than 10 million a year. The United States was founded on taking land from natives and replacing it with their own "civilized and superior inhabitants". The United States is known for segragation, racism, and all types of discrimination. To this day we are still struggling to obtain equality for minorities. Therefore the counterclaim to Dunhoff's thesis is simply a matter of progress. In other words as of right now, America is failing economically, due to income inequality, socially, due to discrimination, gentrification, and politically due to political polarization. These issues convey how society is corrupt due to corporate power governing all. Ultimately, unless there is a sort of leash put on the corporate world or a rise in power from a different party then Corporate America is still the head of our nation.

Almas Redzematovic

12/7/2015 04:22:46 pm

I agree, the power elites that make up the corporate community have total control over our society.

Almas Redzematovic link

12/7/2015 09:23:24 pm

As someone that supports Domhoff's theory, I know there are an ample amount of students that disagree with Domhoff's thesis. So, this article I picked focuses on and provides data of how the upper-middle class is slowly disappearing. That is a big takeaway in today's social class system. Now there is a vast majority of people that are in the middle class and they're not getting the same benefits as people in the upper class. If the next president of the United States does not do anything to address this problem then the middle class people are slowly but surely going to tumble down to the lower-middle class and possibly the lower class. The upper class is valued to a certain extent in which we cannot grasp total control of them because of their economic income and social status is just out of our reach.

This URL provides in depth information on how there is a dangerous separation between the upper class and the rest of this classes.

http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/social-mobility-memos/posts/2015/09/03-separation-upper-middle-class-reeves

Devin Bridgelall

12/8/2015 07:42:28 am

Occupy Wall Street is clear situation that debunks Domhoff's thesis of the corporate and rich only have the power to shape the government and its policies. The Occupy movement started with a small group of protestors to tackle the income inequality by occupying one of the most wealthiest districts or places responsible for wealth. The problem became nationwide and certain states have not only been just listening but also making change. This underscores how the general people have the ability to affect the government and it's policies over the people. This movement sparked even more specific concerns such as wages, universities funding and fossil fuel spending. It has reached those in the political sphere such as Blasio. For something that started as unorganized and a mess evolved into an inspiration for more change.