The Racial Contract Analysis

974 Words2 Pages

Human Rights advocates for the belief that all humans deserve and are entitled to certain basic rights simply because they are human. Although the idea of rights, whether legal or implied, has existed for most of history, the idea that certain rights belong to everyone has not been present all this time (Kabasakal Arat). Social status as well as race has, for as long as the idea of rights have existed, effected what rights you are said to deserve. We see this explained further in works like Charles Mills’ The Racial Contract, Haunani-Kay Trask’s The Color of Violence and Busangokwakhe Dlamini’s Homosexuality in the African Context.
The Racial Contract, according to Mills is “that set of formal or informal agreements or meta-agreements (higher …show more content…

What her chapter in this anthology does is provide yet another example of the Racial Contract and how non-white persons are considered subpersons and are deemed not worthy of basic human rights according to the contract. Trask states that “In a racist society, there is no need to justify white racist behavior” (Trask 83). She then goes on to detail how the native people of Hawai’i are subjected to “peaceful violence” a direct result of the colonializing of her country by white settlers. She describes peaceful violence as a covert form of racism, through practices of nuclearization and militarization, white settlers have contaminated the land, as well as the people. Through the testing of nuclear weapons on the native people, white settlers have shortened the life expectancy and raised the likelihood of cancer among these people – a clear violation of their human rights (Trask 85). The human rights violations of the native people and the infringement on their land was clearly based on race – because the natives are non-white, they were seen as not deserving of human …show more content…

Because of the way in white people have established themselves as the “dominant race” this also effects how we understand the history of the countries in which they have colonized. This concept of the relationship between race and the making of history is apparent in Dlamini’s discussion of homosexuality in Africa. Settlers colonization of Africa was accompanied by European ideals, religious and social ones. With their colonization came Christianity, and this religion altered the way African peoples understood their history. There has been ample proof that tribes within the continent of Africa engaged in homosexual relations however, it was not until European settlers that this was acknowledged as “wrong” (Dlamini 129). Acts such as these had no name until European settlers categorized it as prohibited because of their religion. It was because of European ideals of African people that it was believed that homosexuality didn’t occur in Africa. Dlamini states that Europeans saw Africans as “'primitive man'. Since primitive man was perceived to be close to nature, ruled by instincts, and culturally unsophisticated, he had to be heterosexual; his sexual energies and outlets devoted exclusively to their ‘natural’ purpose – biological reproduction” (Dlamini 132). The history of homosexuality in Africa presents a clear relationship between race and the making of history. The dominant race is

Open Document