The racial contract by charles mills critical thinking example

Racism is essentially pronounced in the twentieth century, assuming a strategic position in both political and administration policies. Earlier scholars such us John Locke popularized the belief in equality of humanity by describing the background of human societies, the state and morality. Particularly, the scholar introduced the idea of a “ state of nature’’ asserting that men are equally free. However, this state is no longer identifiable in the contemporary society that is highly informed by biased racial assumptions. Charles Mills developed the concept of “ racial contract” that describes the state of affairs in the contemporary society. The scholar challenges the existence of egalitarianism of the social contract assumption by noting the presence of social contract under which the whites considers themselves superiors while viewing others races as sub-persons (Mills 5). Accordingly, other races are obliged to serve their masters, the whites who have the responsibility of guiding them towards the “ right” direction. The paper observes that Mill’s concept of the racial contract describes the policies informing the current social-political policies; thus, it is essential in describing the contemporary political ideologies especially the ones assumed by the United States such as the decision of invading Iraq.
Racial contract regards to meta-agreements between whites that classify non-whites as individuals of inferior moral and legal status in relation to whites. Accordingly, the “ contract” offers the white the right of exploiting non-whites and restricting them from accessing some opportunities offered to the whites (Mills 20). Social contract is a concept that describes the origins and authority of government and legitimacy of states as political entities. The idea of racial contract relates with the model of the social contract by modeling institutions that believe on particular racial principles. Racial contract spells theoretical agreements that inform individuals of a particular group enabling them to cooperate and establish unique political units. The relationship between racial contract and social contract is apparent in the model described by Mills where the whites have developed an assumption that the non-whites are inferior. In this context, the whites believe that their governance or legal status is supreme over those of other nations meaning that they have the authority of commanding others (Mills 58). This assumption has motivated that U. S government to assume the responsibility of controlling global political and social policies.
The idea of racial contract presents various features that fundamentally define its authority. Initially, individuals who believe in particular assumptions that delineate people along racial, class or religious aspects establish the model of racial contract. Furthermore, racial contract is a strategy that divides peoples into groups of “ white” and “ non-white.” The scheme considers whites as full persons while non-whites are viewed as inferior and sub-ordinates (Mills 42). Under racial contract model, the moral and legal regulations that control relations between the whites and the non-whites are discriminatory. Particularly, the model offers the whites comparative advantage over the non-whites. Individuals of a superior race essentially benefits from the contract, although not all of them may be signatories. The non-whites mainly do not consent to the contract because they are objects instead of being subjects of the agreement. However, the whites consent to the contract because they view non-whites via the screen of chauvinism and biased assumptions that amount to consensual hallucination (Mills 23). In essence, the racial contract model does not allow the non-white an option of objecting or withdrawing from the contract. This means that racial contract creates a situation where the superior exploits the inferior group. However, categories of the white and non-whites mainly highlight social-political constructions that may often change with time.
In reference to the Iraq invasion by American military, the knowledge on Racial Contract is essential in facilitating the understanding of the reasons behind the invasion. The then United States administration held the perception that Iraq administration did not have the legitimate right of manufacturing weapons of massive destruction. As explained by George Bush, United States could not have allowed Arabic country to manufacture and be the custodian of weapons of massive destruction due to their skin color. The core rationale for Iraq invasion was reached in a joint USA congress resolution known as Iraq resolution. The intention of the invasion was to eliminate the regime that developed and utilized weapon of massive destruction in Iraq. United stated administrations condemned Iraq administration for harboring and supporting terrorists’ activities. To justify the attack, the United States administration also criticized Iraq president for committing outrageous human right abuses. However, despite presenting various arguments to validate the attack, I hold the perception that the core aim of the attack was to control and manage the Middle East non-white military power.
In 1999, researchers rated Middle East countries amongst the fastest developing states in terms of military technological development. The ever-increasing military development among Middle East countries therefore posed a serious threat to America superiority. To counter the military and weapon development in Middle East countries, American planned to attack Iraq because it was the military superpower in the Middle East. The America also attacked Iraq as it intended to change Middle East military policies and strategies. Therefore, as described by United States president, the attack aimed at denying support for militant Islam. The attacks also aimed at transforming and pressurizing all transnational systems and nations agencies that supported Iraq military activities. As described by Mills in his Racial Contract, whites categorizes non-whites as sub-person or inferior people who should not control superior powers and weapons (Mills 67). Therefore, I assert that America attacked Iraq in order to reduce its military control in the Middle East. According to Racial Contract, American believes that they have the right of exploiting other nations and denying them opportunity of investing in military development. American administration also argued that Iraq was supposed to adopt American military technology, as opposed to coming up with their own technological development. With the support of United Nations Security Council, George bush stated that Saddam Hussein was undermining the existing Racial Contract agreement for his personal benefit. However, Hussein was presumed to be a big threat to American and the entire human race. According to American understanding, Iraq had to abide by the set international perception that American was the superpower that that control military development in the world. Despite encountering endless criticism from others states, America used their racial beliefs and stereotype to exploit and attack the non-white in Iraq (Mills 67).
According to my understanding, the attack on Iraq administration reveals the perception that the white beliefs that the non-whites are always inferior. In his argument, the then American president George Bush asserted that due to his religious belief and skin color, Hussein was a threat to America and global community. Based on the attack I can also reveals that United States of America does not uphold democracy principles. According to modern democratic principle, everyone has the right of making independent and uncompromised decision. However, despite understanding the democratic principles, American violated the existing principles by attacking innocent Iraq. I can also argue that, the attack underrated the Iraq sovereignty. The attack of Iraq territory was therefore contravention of the international laws. However, due to their race, the American administration assumed that they have the right of attacking other country’s territory without considering international laws.
The attack witnessed the death of many live and destruction of properties in Iraq. There was huge violation of human right during the attack. However, despite the existence of international laws and courts that control the violation of human rights, there was no action taken against American administration and soldiers. Lack of any action against American administration reveals the level of impunity among white and the manners in which the whites used their powers to underrated and mistreat non-whites
The assumption that non-whites are inferior over whites has so far resulted to regrettable outcomes. By referring to the available information, I can conclude that the level of racial discrimination has been on a rise in the recent decades. To counter the regrettable outcomes racial contracts, global community need to adopt ideas of moral egalitarianisms, equality and respect of individual rights irrespective of one racial. By considering, the impacts of Iraq war to ordinary citizens, American should learn how to respects the rights of other people irrespective of their racial orientation (Mills 107). Severe action should also be taken against soldiers who were involved in the Iraq attack. In addition, I propose changes in the existing international laws and policies to eliminate racial discrimination. By considering the immense destruction of properties after the Iraq attack, America and other developed countries should come up with other means of solving political disagreement instead of engaging in preventable civil conflict.

Work Cited

Mills, Charles W. The Racial Contract. Ithaca, NY [u. a.: Cornell Univ. Press, 1997. Print