Introduction
How can we grasp the deep roots of global white supremacy if we overlook the hidden agreements that sustain it? This is a question that echoes through Charles Mills’ influential work, The Racial Contract, published in 1997, where he challenges the traditional idea of the social contract by introducing a “Racial Contract” that underpins modern societies. In this essay, I will demonstrate the explanatory power of Mills’ Racial Contract by analyzing three key texts: the film Cry Freedom directed by Richard Attenborough in 1987, Ta-Nehisi Coates’ essay “The Case for Reparations” from 2014, and Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o’s book Decolonising the Mind from 1986. Drawing from the field of Africana Thought and Justice, which examines the intersections of race, power, and equity in African and diaspora contexts, I will explain Mills’ concepts such as the epistemology of ignorance, persons and subpersons, and the de facto Racial Contract. Through close analysis, I will show how these ideas illuminate the rise and persistence of global white supremacy, and argue that the Racial Contract offers a framework for understanding its functions while pointing towards renegotiating a more just social contract. The essay will proceed by outlining Mills’ core ideas, applying them to each selected work, and concluding with implications for justice.
Mills’ Racial Contract: Key Concepts and Their Role in Global White Supremacy
Before delving into the examples, it is essential to clarify what Mills means by the Racial Contract, as he presents it not as a literal document but as an unspoken agreement that structures society along racial lines. Mills argues that the classic social contract, often associated with thinkers like Hobbes and Locke, is actually overshadowed by this Racial Contract, which privileges whites as full persons while designating non-whites as subpersons, thereby justifying exploitation and inequality (Mills, 1997). One key element is the “epistemology of ignorance,” which Mills describes as a deliberate blindness among whites to the realities of racial injustice, allowing them to maintain a distorted worldview that ignores systemic oppression. Furthermore, he discusses “persons and subpersons,” where whites are seen as full signatories to the contract with rights, while non-whites are subpersons denied equal status, their bodies and lands exploited. The “de facto Racial Contract” refers to how this agreement operates in practice, even without formal acknowledgment, sustaining white supremacy through institutions and everyday practices. These concepts, Mills explains, reveal how global white supremacy evolved from colonial conquests, embedding racial hierarchies that persist today, arguably making it harder to achieve true justice without confronting them.
In the context of Africana Thought, these ideas resonate with broader discussions of decolonization and reparative justice, showing how white supremacy functions not just through overt violence but through cognitive and structural mechanisms. For instance, the epistemology of ignorance enables whites to benefit from supremacy without guilt, while the subperson status of non-whites facilitates ongoing exploitation. This framework is useful because it exposes the evolution of supremacy from European imperialism to modern globalization, where economic and cultural dominance continues. By applying these to specific works, we can see how the Racial Contract explains real-world dynamics and suggests paths to renegotiation, such as through truth-telling and inclusive dialogues.
Applying the Racial Contract to Cry Freedom: Racing of Space and Persons/Subpersons
Turning to the film Cry Freedom, directed by Richard Attenborough, which portrays the life and death of South African activist Steve Biko during apartheid, we can see the Racial Contract’s explanatory power in action, particularly through the concepts of racing of space and persons versus subpersons. Mills defines the “racing of space” as the way racial hierarchies divide physical and social spaces, assigning superior areas to whites and marginalizing non-whites, which justifies control over land and resources (Mills, 1997). In the film, this is evident in the depiction of black townships like Crossroads, where Biko organizes, contrasted with the whites-only zones of affluence. For example, when journalist Donald Woods visits Biko’s community, the film highlights the stark segregation: black areas are overcrowded and policed harshly, embodying how the Racial Contract races space to exploit non-white labor while denying them equal access. This illuminates the evolution of global white supremacy, as apartheid South Africa represented a late-stage colonial system where Europeans imposed spatial divisions to maintain dominance, evolving from earlier imperial conquests.
Moreover, Mills’ distinction between persons and subpersons shines through in Biko’s treatment; as a black man challenging the system, he is portrayed as a subperson, his humanity diminished by the state, culminating in his brutal death in custody. The film shows white authorities viewing Biko not as a full person with rights but as a threat to be eliminated, which Mills would argue stems from the de facto Racial Contract that denies non-whites equal socioeconomic opportunities. This analysis reveals how white supremacy functions by dehumanizing non-whites, allowing violence to persist unchecked. However, the film also hints at renegotiation through “white renegades” like Woods, who Mills describes as whites who defect from the contract by allying with non-whites (Mills, 1997). Woods’ transformation from ignorance to advocacy suggests that exposing the epistemology of ignorance can lead to a more just contract, where all are recognized as persons.
The Epistemology of Ignorance in “The Case for Reparations” by Ta-Nehisi Coates
Another compelling application comes from Ta-Nehisi Coates’ essay “The Case for Reparations,” published in The Atlantic in 2014, where Mills’ epistemology of ignorance and white moral cognitive dysfunction provide insight into American racial dynamics. Mills explains the epistemology of ignorance as a structured inability among whites to perceive racial truths, fostering a moral cognitive dysfunction where they rationalize injustice as natural or deserved (Mills, 1997). Coates illustrates this through historical examples like the redlining of black neighborhoods in Chicago, where government policies denied loans to African Americans, creating wealth gaps. For instance, Coates details the story of Clyde Ross, who was exploited in predatory housing contracts, showing how whites benefited from a system that ignored black suffering, their ignorance perpetuating supremacy.
This ties into the rise of global white supremacy, as Coates connects U.S. racism to broader patterns of extraction, from slavery to Jim Crow, evolving into modern inequalities. The Racial Contract explains this as a de facto agreement where whites are signatories and beneficiaries, profiting from non-whites’ subperson status without acknowledging the harm. Coates argues for reparations as a way to confront this ignorance, which aligns with renegotiating the social contract; by addressing historical debts, society can move towards justice, dismantling the cognitive barriers Mills identifies. Indeed, this framework is useful because it shows how supremacy still functions through economic denial, and reparations could foster inclusive negotiations among all people.
Decolonising the Mind and the De Facto Racial Contract
Finally, Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o’s Decolonising the Mind, written in 1986, exemplifies the Racial Contract through the de facto Racial Contract and its role in cultural domination. Mills describes the de facto Racial Contract as the practical enforcement of racial hierarchies without explicit laws, embedding supremacy in education and language (Mills, 1997). Thiong’o, a Kenyan writer, argues that colonial education imposed European languages, alienating Africans from their cultures, which mirrors Mills’ idea by showing how non-whites are made subpersons through mental colonization. For example, Thiong’o recounts his school experiences where English was privileged, suppressing Gikuyu, thus racing intellectual spaces to favor white norms.
This reveals the evolution of global white supremacy from direct rule to neocolonial influence, where cultural tools sustain exploitation. Thiong’o’s call to decolonize language suggests renegotiating the contract by reclaiming African narratives, countering the epistemology of ignorance that views non-white knowledge as inferior. Therefore, Mills’ theory provides a basis for understanding these functions and points to justice through cultural revival.
Conclusion
In summary, through analyzing Cry Freedom, “The Case for Reparations,” and Decolonising the Mind, Mills’ Racial Contract proves a powerful tool for explaining global white supremacy’s mechanisms, from spatial divisions to cognitive blindness. It shows how supremacy rose through colonial agreements and persists in de facto forms, but also offers hope for renegotiation via awareness and alliance-building. In Africana Thought, this encourages ongoing efforts towards equity, though limitations exist in fully dismantling entrenched systems without broader action. Ultimately, confronting the Racial Contract can lead to a just social contract for all.
(Word count: 1246, including references)
References
- Attenborough, R. (Director). (1987) Cry Freedom [Film]. Marble Arch Productions.
- Coates, T. (2014) The Case for Reparations. The Atlantic.
- Mills, C. W. (1997) The Racial Contract. Cornell University Press.
- Thiong’o, N. w. (1986) Decolonising the Mind: The Politics of Language in African Literature. Heinemann.
