Citizen Nation

Thanks for taking the time last week to ask some pre-election day questions. I got some good ones – some were predictive or philosophical or concerned about what will happen on or after the election (so I can’t really speak to those), but others sought clarification on the issues, political views, or processes. And those I’m happy to address or have us consider together.

Voting in Massachusetts
State Elections Division Information (MA Secretary of State)
Official Voter Guide
Information on the 4 Ballot Questions (WBUR)
How do ballot questions get on the ballot, anyway?
Who are your elected officials?
What and who will be on your ballot? – use the My Election Info search engine to generate a sample statewide ballot; your actual ballot may also have local candidates on it
How can you find out more about the people running for office on your ballot? Head to BallotPedia, VoteSmart.org, League of Women Voters, or individually Googling the candidates to reach their campaign websites, news coverage, and political ads.

Conservative v. Liberal – Definitions and Social Psychology Perspective
Where do you fall on the political spectrum? (Pew Research quiz)
Do conservatives and liberals use language differently? (UK Daily Mail)
Are liberal and conservative brains measurably different? Studies suggest yes (ProCon.org)
How do early life experiences affect eventual political views? (Psychology Today)
Is political preference born, wired, or made? (ABC News Nightline)

How the Primary & Nomination Process Works
A really basic overview (Washington Post)
A more detailed description (Council on Foreign Relations)
A lesson plan (New York Times)

Crash Course on the Electoral College
How the electoral college works, several versions: ABC News (2016) / TED-ED (2012) / National Archives / CommonCraft (a bit old, from 2008) / Prager University (posted in 2015 by a conservative, for-profit, nonaccredited organization) / VoteSmart
Interactive Prediction Map (National Archives)

Official Party Platforms 2016 (alphabetical order)
Democratic
Green
Independent Evan McMullin
Libertarian
Republican

What Happens After Nov 8?
Electoral College Voting and Election Certification (December 19, 2016)
Transition Team
Outgoing President becomes a “Lame Duck”
New President is Inaugurated (January 20, 2017)
New President Appoints People to Serve in Cabinet and other Appointed Positions

The next several class periods will explore the history of immigration in law and society in the early part of the 20th century (keeping in mind, of course, the continuing relevance of that debate to our own time).

Tuesday 10/18 The “Long View” of Contested American Citizenship. Reading / prepare to discuss: Linda Kerber, “The Meanings of Citizenship” (1997). Bring to class: an immigration story to share (your own, a family story, someone else’s story, from any time period).

Links for Today:
Vote (Early!) PSA from Pres Obama
Election Wisdom from Ultra Spiritual Life

Thursday 10/20 Immigration Law. Reading: *NOTE this is a CHANGE FROM THE SYLLABUS* Ngai, “The Architecture of Race in American Immigration Law” (1999) AND Collins, “Aliens v. Free Born” (1930). Also, Soapbox #4 [Tim, Alex, Simone, Michael, Monica, Amanda, and Rebeca]

Tuesday 10/25 Special Location for Today = LRC 121. We will be screening the film “Citizen USA” and we’re opening it up to the campus as a Democracy Café event, so we’ll meet in a bigger room with some more seating for guests.

Thursday 10/27 Petitioners at the Gates. We will have a special guest speaker today from the local field office of US Citizenship and Immigration Services, in addition to Soapbox #5 [Robert, Janine, Dave, Aleta, Kevin]. Reading: The compelling personal account of Lee Puey You at Angel Island Immigration Station in 1939, Yung “Bowlful of Tears.”

Links for Today:
Citizens Initiative Review pilot project about MA Question 4
Lousiana law about documentation required for marriage
First Native American named an ambassador
America is a Bad Boyfriend (College Humor)

Tuesday 11/1 [Note this is a typo on the syllabus, it’s not the 18th obviously] Melting Pot. Reading: Horace Kallen’s 1915 Essay “Democracy vs. the Melting Pot” (in 2 parts: Part 1, Part 2) *and* Barrett, “Americanization from the Bottom Up.” Due in class: your CITIZEN Project Draft and Bibliography

Thursday 11/3 Workshop in Class on Japanese American Internment During World War II. Reading ahead of time: Goldstein-Shirley, “Enemies in Their Own Lands.” Bring laptops to class, we’ll be working in groups with a variety of documents related to the experience of Americans during wartime internment.

Thursday 10/13 Reading is RV Chapter 6, about the long struggle for women’s ability to fully exercise their voting rights as citizens.

For your response paper due Thurs 10/13 (2-3 pages, double-spaced) – you can base it on any of our recent readings: Wolfley, Love, or something drawn from chapters 4-6 of Keyssar. Address this question (or some portion of this question): How did geography, gender, race, and/or class inform the meaning of citizenship by 1900? Use this paper to demonstrate what you’ve learned in the course so far, QUOTING from the readings (cite any direct quotations) and discussing any quoted passages in depth. In your writing try to avoid just summarizing or restating the readings; go below the surface level.

Pro tip: think of this response paper less as a personal/opinion response, and more of a dry run for the kind of essay question that will appear on the final exam.

Today’s Links
Voting Registration Deadline extended in Florida due to Hurricane Matthew
538’s Nate Silver’s thought exercise on what the electoral map would look like if only women voted
Some Trump supporters responded with the #repealthe19th Twitter hashtag

Bonus Video for Today

The next three class sessions deal with colonized nations and territories within the jurisdiction of the United States. Their people have claim to American citizenship, although that claim has been at times historically contested, hard-won, or tenuous. We will explore these different experiences and histories and compare them to one another.

Tues 10/4 – “Empires, Subject and Islands.” Reading (PDFs also available on Blackboard): Eric Love, “White is the Color of Empire” and Francis Torres, “Rejecting Colonial Justification: Puerto Rico and the Insular Cases”

Thurs 10/6 We will view the film The Insular Empire: America in the Mariana Islands during class. This 2010 PBS documentary traces the history of the Mariana Islands and its indigenous peoples as both American citizens and colonial subjects. Watch the trailer:

Update 10/10: the DVD is on course reserve at the library if you missed it or want to view it again; here’s the note sheet we used to take our notes on the film.

Reminder: Your CITIZEN proposal is due in class Thurs 10/6 | Download project guidelines | Or visit the CITIZEN Project tab above

Tues 10/11 The Disenfranchised. Reading: RV Chapter 5 plus “Jim Crow: Indian Style”

Soapbox Presenters on 10/11 = Alexis, Antrienig, Trish, Kim, Rachel, Noah, Matt

(Photo, American soldiers raising the flag over Guam in WW2)

Assigned reading this week: GC Ch 3-4 and RV Ch 4

Due Thurs 9/29: Citizenship Exam Reflection Paper

At this point, you have taken some version of the US citizenship test twice, and studied for it using the entire set of 100 Civics, History and Geography questions. Compare your scores on the two tries. Write a short reflection paper (2 pages, double-spaced) on what this experience has meant to you, or what you found instructive or surprising about taking the exam.

Some questions you could consider:

How (and when) did you learn the answers to these questions?

Do you think these are the right questions to ask? If not, what else do you think naturalized citizens should know, or do, to demonstrate their fitness for American citizenship?

Would you advocate for a test like this to be a qualification for voting even for naturally-born citizens? If so, how often should it be taken – once, or renewed at certain intervals, like a drivers license? What would the logistics of that look like? If someone challenged such a program as unconstitutional, by what reasoning would you defend it? What might be the consequences if such a policy were instituted?

Course update: I’ve added two new sections in Blackboard – an archive of the response paper prompts, and a list of calendar events outside of class which can be used for extra credit.

For Tues 9/27: When the Constitution was first established and ratified, slaves were counted as less than full persons for purposes of representation in our government, and enjoyed none of the legal privileges or rights of citizenship. To be precise, each was 3/5 of a person. This “compromise,” as it is often called (and is that a good word for it, really??), was created (of course) without the consent or input of enslaved people, as a way to balance power and apportionment between slave/free and large/small states at the time of the Constitutional convention.

So: when, and how, and why, did blacks first become free and then become counted as full people under the Constitution? Our discussion on Tuesday 9/27 will focus on Good Citizen, Ch. 3 and Right to Vote, Ch 4. Please take careful notes and/or bring the books to class. Also, please study for your re-take of the U.S. Citizenship Exam which we will do in class.

Due in class: A 2-3 page double-spaced, printed response paper based on the prompt distributed in Thursday’s class. If you attended the Profiled film on Thursday or the conference on Civic Engagement in Higher Ed on Friday for extra credit, your write-up paper is also due.

Discussion Questions:

What were strategies (political, religious and otherwise) used to challenge the legality and morality of slavery? How successful were those strategies? How did they compare with early strategies for women’s suffrage?

Was granting the vote to black freedmen in the South during Reconstruction part of the general trend toward widening of the franchise, or an exception to it?

What did the 14th Amendment accomplish? What did it NOT accomplish?

Why is the story of the passage of the 15th Amendment a “strange odyssey”?

How were the experiences of white women and black men connected during Reconstruction? Where did this leave black women?

Describe the “redemption” of the South. In what sense was it redeemed?

After being enfranchised, how were African-Americans then (legally and otherwise) disenfranchised?

Given this history, what is the meaning of legal “personhood” in 19th century America, and how is that different from citizenship?

All women were omitted from many of the privileges of American citizenship, and some of them strenuously and articulately resisted. In addition, millions of women suffered under the double burden of being both female *and* enslaved. Even free white women used “slavery” as a way to talk about their legal predicament, and to advocate not only for abolition but for gender equality. We will read three examples of nineteenth-century women’s writings on citizenship and legal rights, plus a short overview from a women’s history textbook.

Reminder: Soapbox presenters are listed under the Soapbox tab above

Reading for Thurs 9/22:
1) Start with this 4-page PDF packet. Page 1 is a brief overview of the legal status of women in early America. Pages 2-4 are an excerpt of an 1843 essay by the Massachusetts editor of the Transcendentalist journal, The Dial, Margaret Fuller, titled “The Great Lawsuit.”

2) Online, read an 1837 letter from abolitionist Sarah Grimke, responding to a “women should keep to their place” letter drafted by New England clergy, who called the Grimke sisters “unnatural” and umwomanly for their public speeches.

3) And then, read the 1848 Declaration of Sentiments, drafted at the first women’s rights convention at Seneca Falls, New York. As it follows the form (and function?) of the Declaration of Independence, it called attention to the neglect of women in the nation’s legal and Constitutional framework. It’s bold for its time, but note how it is framed as a declaration of sentiments, i.e. feelings and emotions, the “natural” province of 19th century women. Clever strategy!

Prepare for discussion with these questions:

Compare two or more of these readings to each other. What are areas of potential agreement or disagreement?

What basis of authority do these writers claim for women’s rights? How broadly would they like those rights extended?

What demands, if any, are they making? Would these seem reasonable to their audiences, given what you know about the values and concerns of emerging American democracy? For whom are they speaking? All women? Just some women? Which women?

What in these documents was new or surprising to you? What context does it connect to for you? What did you already know about life for antebellum American women?

Other resources: “Women and the Law” primary source collection from Harvard Baker Business Library

Image: 1859 drawing of a fictional women’s rights convention, showing angry men in the gallery denouncing the proceedings (Harpers Weekly, source: Library of Congress)

Discussion questions for Tues 9/20: What was American democracy like in the first half of the 19th century? Would it be recognizable to us as “democracy”? What was happening with voting rights in this era (and why)?

Harvard professor Alexander Keyssar takes on these questions in Chapters 2 and 3 of The Right to Vote. Please read carefully and bring the book with you, ready to discuss.

EXTRA CREDIT Opportunity this week: Attend a screening of the film Profiled on Thurs, Sept 22 at 1:00 pm in North/South Auditorium in the Student Center. I will grant extra credit for anyone who attends and writes up a review of the film and how it connects to our course topics – due by Tuesday, Sept 27.

For list of Thursday soapbox presenters, check the Soapbox tab, above.

Film clip from Tuesday:

On Thursday 9/15 our class will focus on the Constitution, and on the “Constitutional moment,” i.e. the era and cultural milieu in which it was framed. Your reading is Chapter 2 of Schudson’s Good Citizen and also the full text of the US Constitution. You’ll want to bring both of these items to class, if possible. The Constitution can be found in the back of any US history textbook you have on hand, or you can print a copy from the web, or download it as a mobile app onto your phone.

Discussion Questions:

Are voting rights natural or granted?
Should citizenship be linked to the right to vote?
Why the electoral college system?
Where / how often does the Constitution mention the words “citizen” or “citizenship”?

Thursday’s soapbox speakers are Dean and Kristen

Reminders:
1) please complete the citizenship exam & send screenshot by Friday 9/9 — see post below for details
2) email Dr. Hangen if you are willing to give a soapbox speech on Thurs 9/15 — I need 6 brave volunteers — see Soapbox tab above — I’ll explain more about this in Tuesday’s class and pass around a signup sheet

For Tues 9/13 we move from a generic, conceptual definition of citizenship to (in Bellamy’s terms) a more empirical examination of actual citizenship in the American colonies and early republic. Who could be a citizen? Who was deemed capable of consenting? Who actually represented whom and how?

The reading is Chapter 1 in both our two textbooks, Alexander Keyssar’s The Right to Vote and Michael Schudson’s The Good Citizen. If you don’t yet have the books, those chapters are available as PDF files in Blackboard. You will immediately notice that while they cover similar time periods, each has a quite different focus. Keyssar is concerned primarily with the narrower right to vote within the umbrella of citizenship exclusions and requirements, while Schudson is less interested in how the boundaries of citizenship were drawn and more interested in political practices broadly defined, and on what constitutes “good” citizenship in the past.

Discussion Questions:
What myths did these readings “bust” for you?
Who was eligible to vote in colonial America (where, and under what circumstances)? Specifically– why and how was suffrage limited before the 1780s?
Where might historians disagree (i.e. where are the fracture lines in these two scholarly arguments)?
How “democratic” was colonial politics?

If you’re able, bring the books to class, or take good notes and bring your notes.