1. Marx argues that capitalism is the "best" economic system for producing technological innovations; i.e. for enhancing the level of the development of the forces of production. Explain the internal logic of capitalism. Yet Marx goes on to argue that this same internal dynamic will necessarily create a crisis within capitalism that will ultimately cause an intensification in the class struggle. Additionally, this crisis will inevitable result in a socialist revolution--explain. From a structural Marxist perspective, why does it not make any difference who is in political office or who are the CEO's of America's major corporations? Extend your analysis and explain why corporations necessarily violate laws? Based on the examples of Russia, China, and Cuba, is it true that socialism equals a totalitarian form of government and law? According to Marx, what is necessary for successful democratic socialism?

2. Brady argues that Cuba's present legal structure has a mixed legal heritage of bourgeois and socialist legality--explain. In the context of the Cuban revolution, what are the advantages and disadvantages of both forms of legality? To answer this question, use examples of both forms of legality. Brady also argues that China does not have a theoretically pure form of socialist justice. That is, that China has two forms of justice "popular" and "bureaucratic." What are the differences between these two forms of legal orders? What are the political, economic, and social forces that have created the need for two legal forms to exist simultaneously within China?

3. Brady basically argues that the inability of China and Cuba to develop decentralized legal forms results from internal contradictions within these societies--explain. It can be further argued that Cuba and China's inability to institutionalize socialist justice has resulted from a lack of development of their forces of production--explain.

4. Using all your readings including Greenberg, Balbus, MacKinnon, etc., critique the concept that the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are the structural guarantees that America is and always will be a 'just' system. From the perspective of these articles explain, in detail, with conviction, how these two documents legitimate and mystify an unjust economic, political, and social order.

5. Use the Balbus and MacKinnon articles to fundamentally critique the concept that "justice equals like cases getting like outcomes." Include the following quotes from the MacKinnon article in your answer (no need to repeat them verbatim). "Formally, the state is male in that objectivity is its norm... Practical will mean that which can be done without changing anything...The law does this by adjudicating the level of acceptable force starting just above the level set by what is seen as normal male sexual behavior, rather than at the victim's, or women's point of violation...But assault that is consented to is still assault; rape consented to is intercourse...The distance between most sexual violations of women and the legally perfect rape measures the imposition of someone else's definition upon women's experiences. Rape, from women's point of view, is not prohibited it is regulated.... Hermeneutically unpacked, read: because he did not perceive she did not want him, she was not violated. She had sex... But men are systematically conditioned not even to notice what women want.... When it is most ruthlessly neutral, it will be most male; when it is most sex blind, it will be most blind to the sex of the standard being applied. When it most closely conforms to precedent, to "facts," to legislative intent, it will most closely enforce socially male norms and most thoroughly preclude questioning their content as having a point of view at all. Abstract rights will authoritize the male experience of the world."

6. In detail, outline the double abstraction process in the commodification of capitalist law whereby the unequal become equal. Draw the parallels between the commodification of capitalist law and commodity fetishism (i.e. the process of the extraction of surplus value whereby the exploitation inherent to capitalist production is hidden and perceived to be equal). How does the form of law, the individual as the legal bearer of formal rights, contribute to the legitimization of capitalism? How do objective tests also reaffirm structural inequalities? This whole line of reasoning suggests that the base of a capitalist society is reproduced in its superstructure. Explain this base/superstructure analysis. Is this base/superstructure argument consistent with critical legal theory and a semiotic theory of capitalist law? In detail, explain the ideological implications of commodity fetishism and the commodity fetishism of capitalist law?  Outline the differences between instrumental and structural forms of Marxism.  Why is conflict theory and instrumental Marxism inadequate explanations of how law is created and implemented in a capitalist society such as the United States?  Use your textbook to answer these questions.

7. Given that the base of the capitalist economic order is reproduced in its superstructure, explain why the state/law should "wither" away when the means of production are owned collectively and democratically controlled. While in theory the state/law should wither away after the socialist revolution, in part, the exact opposite has happened in Cuba, China, and Russia. That is, these "socialist" (some now former socialist countries) countries have established formal legal orders that bestow legal rights on individuals. Based on this contradiction, E. P. Thompson has argued that the rule of law is an essential good. It protects the individual from arbitrary state power. He further argues, as does others, that the rule of law is necessary even in socialist countries. Does this "failure" of "socialism" (why has socialism "failed" in most countries?) suggest that Marx was fundamentally incorrect in his assumption that the base of a society determines the form and content of the superstructure? Reconcile, within Marxist theory, this apparent contradiction between socialist theory and socialist practice. Theoretically, under what conditions will the state and the need for law wither away?