Thus, from Mills` perspective, racism is not just an unfortunate coincidence of Western democratic and political ideals. It is not that we have a political system that has been perfectly designed and, unfortunately, applied imperfectly. One of the reasons we continue to think that the problem of race in the West is relatively superficial, that it does not go all the way, is the impact that the idealized social contract has on our imagination. According to Mills, we continue to believe the myths that social contract theory tells us – that everyone is equal, that everyone is treated equally before the law, that the Founding Fathers were committed to equality and freedom for all, and so on. Thus, one of the real goals of social contract theory is to hide the true political reality from the eyes – some people are granted the rights and freedoms of complete people, and others are treated as sub-persons. The racial treaty shapes the structure of our political systems and lays the foundation for the continued racial oppression of non-whites. So we cannot respond by simply including more non-whites in the mix of our political institutions, our representation, etc. Rather, we need to review our policy in general from the point of view of the racial treaty and start from where we are, in full knowledge of how our society has been informed by the systematic exclusion of some people from the realm of politics and the treaty. This “naturalized” feature of the racial contract, meaning it tells a story about who we really are and what is contained in our history, is better, according to Mills, because it contains the promise of one day allowing us to truly live up to the norms and values that are at the heart of Western political traditions. Rousseau has two different theories of the social contract.
The first is found in his essay Discourse on the Origin and Foundations of Inequality Among Men, commonly known as the Second Discourse, and is a report on the moral and political development of man over time, from a state of nature to modern society. As such, it contains his naturalized representation of the social contract, which he considers highly problematic. The second is his normative or idealized theory of the social contract and aims to provide the means to mitigate the problems that modern society has created for us, as set forth in the social contract. Mills` central argument is that there is a “racial contract” that is even more fundamental to Western society than the social contract. This racial contract primarily determines who is considered a legal and political person in its own right, and thus defines the parameters of who can “unite” with the freedom and equality promised by the social contract. Some people, especially white men, are individuals in their own right according to the racial contract. As such, they have the right to conclude the statutes and certain legal contracts. They are considered fully human and therefore deserve equality and freedom.
Their status as full-fledged persons gives them greater social power. In particular, it gives them the power to enter into contracts to be the subject of the contract, while other persons are denied such a privilege and are relegated to the status of contractual objects. According to Hobbes, the justification for political engagement is this: since people are inherently selfish but rational, they will choose to submit to the authority of a sovereign in order to live in a civil society conducive to their own interests. Hobbes argues for this by imagining man in his natural state, or in other words, the state of nature. In the state of nature, which according to Hobbes is purely hypothetical, people are natural and exclusively selfish, they are more or less equal to each other (even the strongest person can be killed in sleep), there are limited resources, and yet there is no power that can force people to cooperate. Given these conditions in the state of nature, Hobbes concludes that the state of nature would be unbearably brutal. In the state of nature, every human being is always afraid of losing his life to another. They are unable to ensure the long-term satisfaction of their needs or desires. Long-term or complex cooperation is not possible because the state of nature can rightly be described as a state of total distrust.
Given Hobbes` reasonable assumption that most people want to avoid their own death in the first place, he concludes that the state of nature is the worst possible situation people can find themselves in. This is the eternal and inevitable state of war. As many citizens remain disillusioned with their respective systems of government, they tend to turn to anti-establishment and Eurosceptic parties, with fifty percent of all EU citizens tending not to trust the EU in 2018 (see Figure 10). [25] Within the EU, these movements willingly exploit this disillusionment. In the East, one of the most dramatic examples is Hungary. Viktor Orbán, the Hungarian prime minister, even went so far as to say that the EU should abandon the “nightmares of the United States of Europe” and used anti-European sentiment to gain momentum for a Eurosceptic platform. [26] Similarly, Italy in southern Europe is home to the Movimento 5 Stelle, which advocates a non-binding referendum on the EU. capitalise once again on the mistrust of many citizens towards the process of Europeanisation. [27] In Western Europe too, there is the right-wing populist Alternative for Germany party in Germany, known for its eurosceptic stance and anti-immigrant platform. Although the party has weakened since the reduction in the influx of migrants, this party is taking advantage of Eurosceptic sentiment and mobilizing it for the party`s support.
[28] Despite the relatively low level of distrust of the government, Sweden also has its fair share of anti-establishment parties. In 2018, the right-wing Sverigedemokraterna won 62 seats in parliament with an anti-immigration platform and the promise of a referendum on Sweden`s EU membership. [29] Although national differences are common, the prevalence and growth of these Eurosceptic parties, which exploit widespread European disillusionment with the system, is remarkable. The idea of the social contract had a great influence on the American founding fathers, especially Thomas Jefferson (1743-1826) and James Madison (1751-1836). The U.S. Constitution begins with the three words “We, the people.” that embody this idea of popular sovereignty at the very beginning of this key document. According to this principle, a government established by the free choice of its people is obliged to serve the people who ultimately have the supreme sovereignty or power to retain or overthrow that government. Some institutions – public, private and social – and some individuals are beginning to adapt and act.
In the private sector, the Business Roundtable, a group of CEOs of major U.S. companies, has shown a more comprehensive reassessment. In August 2019, it announced that its members were redefining a company`s goal of caring about employees, customers, suppliers and communities and creating value as they do with shareholders. The social sector and other forms of institutions, including philanthropic foundations and religious charities, also play a greater role in addressing some of the key challenges. Families help their young members with information and housing. In the United Kingdom, parents who support their children rank 10th among the largest mortgage lenders. In Citizens` Perspective`s second quarterly report 2018, disenfranchised citizens attributed their distrust to the lack of wealth distribution, persistent income inequality, growing individualism, and lack of social cohesion, health care, and integration. [17] The economic situation also played a role […].