1. Response one-HUM-08
The exclusions of groups of people to the social contract were
perhaps so woven into the fabric of society that many people
took it for granted that this was a western and European
contract.” As I have explored this concept, I have come to
realize that it truly was ignorance that led the belief that a man
of color could never claim intelligence, educability, and even
the right to be called human. The plight of the black man, as a
forever slave, was ingrained indelibly into the minds of nearly
every white individual, at least in Europe and colonial America,
as well as many other places around the world. As we have seen
“these authors struggling … with the issues of indigenous
populations and slavery” throughout our readings, we have also
observed sympathy through the eyes of Adam Smith. I believe
his sympathetic gestures offer us a glimpse of, what I am sure
existed, many souls who were filled with regret and sorrow
toward how Africans were mistreated. Humanitarianism toward
black people existed within acts of extreme caution and fear.
“The social contract … was deliberately set up for the
privileged; it did not include non whites.” Humanity, however,
eventually abolished slavery, but racism continues and may
always exist because of our ugly past.
The following is an excerpt from my final paper.
Slavery provided the foundation of northern colonization during
the beginning of the seventeenth century. As previously noted,
the institution of slavery had already been established as a
natural part of society. Spencer Pack gives credit to Adam
Smith as having found a “deep connection between owning
slaves and demanding independence from England” (261).
Wendy Warren, in her interview with Terry Gross, provides
astounding facts concerning early colonization. While the
colonists sought freedom, in particular, religious independence
from England, they, however, relied on slave labor to ensure
their own sovereign authority. “Puritans … actually owned

2. enslaved Africans. And it’s hard to reconcile this vision of
religious freedom with the practice of slavery” (Warren). Slave
history from the northern colonies offers much insight regarding
the colonization of our country. Its exclusion from textbooks
and other publications proves inexcusable. Only lately have
historians produced accurate records detailing how slaves
played a leading role in the founding of cities such as Boston
and New York. Recent articles offer astounding additional
information to our appalling history. Winthrop Jordan validates
Wendy Warren’s premises and provides a glimpse of John
Smith’s journals that reveal “that Negroes first came to the
British continental colonies in 1619” (18).
Jordan cites Philip A. Brice as revealing that documents provide
information that “enslavement … [began] … around 1660, when
statutes bearing on slavery were passed for the first time” (18).
Jordan’s research maintains that the earliest written records
indicate colonists “assumed that prejudice against the Negro
was natural and almost innate in the white man … [and rested
in] … overseas imperialism …and full-throated Anglo-
Saxonism” (19). Philip Morgan, while claiming that no one “in
the ancient world ever seriously questioned the placement of
slavery in society” (51), names several European countries who
supported the enslavement of Africans to ensure productivity in
establishing our colonies. The reality of prejudice that followed
the colonists, as hungry as they professed themselves to be for
freedom, remains astounding as well as absurd.
RESPONSE TWO HUM-08
The main problem that Charles Mills focuses on in his work The
Racial Contract is the way in which social contract theory is
taught, discussed, and developed in mainstream philosophical
and political discourse. Mills’ Racial Contract is all about
exposing what he sees as the diminished, overlooked, or worse,
deliberately ignored, racial dimension that underlies the history
of social-contract theorizing. As Mills explains, traditional
social contract theorizing identifies the social contract as “the

3. crucial human metamorphosis…from ‘natural’ man to
‘civil/political’ man, from the resident of the state of nature to
the citizen of the created society”. Mills argues that this
“raceless” and “ideal” presentation of social contract theory
belies the actual racial and historical circumstances that inform
contractarian thinking, all the way from its heyday in the
16th and 17th centuries to the present day. Mills’ “Racial
Contract” is offered up as a corrective, one that identifies the
real metamorphosis at the heart of social contract theory as “the
preliminary conceptual partitioning and corresponding
transformation of human populations into ‘white’ and
‘nonwhite’ men.” According to Mills, “the Racial contract
‘constructs’ race…’White’ people do not preexist but are
brought into existence as ‘whites’ by the Racial Contract”. In
other words, the categorization of people as ‘white’ and ‘non-
white’ is partially a product of social contract theorizing. This
is because the rise of social contract theory coincides with a
very specific historical moment. As Mills explains, “the golden
age of contract theory [1650 to 1800] overlapped with the
growth of a European capitalism whose development was
stimulated by the voyages of exploration that increasingly gave
the contract a racial subtext”. This historical context also lends
social contract theory an often overlooked economic dimension,
one that is crucial for understanding the need to parse humans
in to the categories of ‘white’ and ‘non-white’. As Mills
explains, “the point of leaving the state of nature is in part to
secure a stable environment for the industrious appropriation of
the world”. Of course, the “industrious appropriation of the
world” necessitated a demarcation of those who would do the
appropriating and those whose resources would be appropriated.
It would also require some sort of justification for this
demarcation. For Mills, the philosophy and language at the
heart of social contract theory, which is typically presented as
racially neutral and applicable to all men, actually only applies
to white men and this is demonstrated historically by the ways
in which non-white men have been systematically excluded

4. from the supposedly universal rights and protections guaranteed
by the social contract. Mills explains that the typical strategy
for justifying the exclusion of non-whites has been to portray
non-whites as inherently “savage,” “irrational,” lacking in
culture or industry, or not fully human, and thus not eligible for
the rights and protections offered by the social contract which
require the ability to exercise a sufficient degree of moral,
political, and rational thought. All of this was done, in Mills’
view, with the intent of enriching the lives and territories of
those who had the fortune of being considered ‘white’
(typically, European people and people of European descent).
Therefore, according to Mills, the historical exclusion of non-
whites from these rights and protections has not merely been a
bug in social contract theory, but is actually a feature of it. It is
the racial reality behind the idea of the social contract that leads
Mills to dub it the "Racial Contract
RESPONSE THREE HUM-08
I have to agree with Marx. The social contract is lopsided. It
always has been. There was a precipitous drop in health,
longevity and agency in the transition from hunter-gatherer to
agrarian societies. Only recently have those issues been
adequately dealt with. But at what cost? Empires depend on a
draw of resources and labor which are not in equilibrium. The
US for example consumes an immense amount of energy. That
dependence is why we have an interest in the Middle East. You
can see how fixing one problem leads to another. I'd go further
than Marx though. Max Stirner, a contemporary of Marx, would
have called the social contract a spook--a ghost of the mind. It
has no basis in reality. The contract, which I don't recall
signing, has power only inasmuch as the individual provides,
and to the extent that it's enforced via violence. Pacifists might
say something like: if you require violence to enforce your
ideas, maybe they're not such great ideas. If we conjecture that
each nation possesses its own contract, then yes, I absolutely
believe inequality is built-in to the benefit of those who devise
it. Citizenship is by nature exclusive. What that means is that

5. the citizens of those nations which subjugate others enjoy the
fruits of surplus. Whether they're drawing resources from
abroad, or bringing in slaves and wage workers, there's an
inherent imbalance of power and consumption. Rejecting that
position of privilege is not in any citizen's self-interest. That's
why such conditions persist until the system runs its course, or
a bigger fish comes along. The idea of relinquishing control
doesn't appeal to ones desire for material prosperity. Security
ultimately trumps social justice. Fear is a strong motivator--fear
of going without, regardless of whether one has more than
enough.
I'm reminded of a segment of social critique from The Torture
Garden, by Octave Mirbeau:
You're obliged to pretend respect for people and institutions
you think absurd. You live attached in a cowardly fashion to
moral and social conventions you despise, condemn, and know
lack all foundation. It is that permanent contradiction between
your ideas and desires and all the dead formalities and vain
pretenses of your civilization which makes you sad, troubled
and unbalanced. In that intolerable conflict you lose all joy of
life and all feeling of personality, because at every moment they
suppress and restrain and check the free play of your powers.
That's the poisoned and mortal wound of the civilized world.
An excerpt from my draft, on an aspect of moral goods,
regarding a shift from collective duty to individual culpability:
Tyranny of the majority is a well-known and discussed concept
in the US. As the reins of representative democracy are
loosened, there exists a growing commitment to compulsory
education and continued education, to protect minority rights,
while bolstering the democratic contribution of the individual.
Ethically, today, we strike a balance between acting in
accordance with the categorical imperative (something like the
Golden Rule,) and doing what is reasonable. This is partly due
to conflicting allegiances, but also a tug between moral
behavior and self-interest. Citizens are educated at the most
basic level to obey authority until it becomes unethical to do so;

6. specifically, Principle IV of Principles of International Law
Recognized in the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal and in the
Judgment of the Tribunal, "The fact that a person acted pursuant
to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him
from responsibility under international law, provided a moral
choice was in fact possible to him." This principle was not
always widely accepted, and authorities could construe such
disobedience as insubordination, or worse, treason. Informed
and educated voters are a defense against tyranny of the
majority. The shame of correcting a moral mistake is far worse
than having crusaded against the majority’s insistence to do
wrong. Dietrich Bonheoffer, a German theologian, remarked,
upon leaving the safety of America for Germany at a time in
which he was under the Reich’s eye, that he did not feel he
could be present for the rebuilding of Germany unless he was
present for its destruction. It is so easy, in the shortsighted
pursuit of self-interest, to fall into an ethical lapse. A perfect
example is the crumbling of the US financial sector in 2008,
during which taxpayers came to grips with the cost of greed, as
they found themselves responsible for footing the bill. This sort
of shock is, perhaps, what the common citizen needs to address
immorality at every step--every small step that leads to
cataclysmic failure.
RESPONSE one NS-08
The United States has lead efforts in international
democratization. Democracy is successful, attractive, and
adaptable (Holestine, APUS, 2017). The US has been leading
the movement in the spreading of a democratic state and
political liberalism. The US’s military strength in recent
decades has proved to lay a solid foundation for the overall
global order. Recent military involvement has been injected into
Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, and many others. There
are US military bases throughout the entire world, that assists in

7. the monitoring of every ocean that preserves the international
order. It is important that the US does not use this strength
recklessly to dive into more wars or more conflict.
The best hope for the United States participation in the
international order will be to use military and nonmilitary tools
to exercise the US’s influence. The US must continue to be be
present throughout the world. Military bases are vital to not
only the US but to the region in which bases are located. US
military bases work closely with regional countries to develop
and grow their military so that they can protect themselves and
to also give the citizens of that country hope, reliance on their
government, and a sense of nationalism that many countries in
the Middle East lack due to displacement and war. Military
advise and assist roles are essential to countries in MENA.
Countries like Afghanistan benefit from the US’s advise, assist,
and train missions. Not only does Afghanistan benefit from
being trained and educated on building a sustainable security
capacity but the larger role of NATO benefits in these counter
terrorism missions. US Public Affairs Officers that are located
on each base abroad should also have a driven mission to unite
the people of that country. Public Affairs Officers communicate
to the public what the military is focusing on, training on, and
their capabilities. This key role in US military should be trained
to other militaries or security forces as well. Communication
with the public is vital for a positive view on the government.
Not only communication but feedback from the public is also
essential. When citizens believe that they are being heard and
feel that their government is stable, they are less likely to
commit crimes and retreat to terrorist organizations for
stability.
The US must maintain peace, prevent proliferation of weapons
of mass destruction, and combat the spread of terrorism through
means other than military capabilities as well. NGO’s that focus
on providing education or rebuilding the current educational
systems in crisis countries. Mr. Jorge Sequeira, UNESCO
Representative to the Counter-Terrorism Initiative Task Force

8. stated that extremism gains ground and flourishes when young
people lack choices and meaning in their lives (United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 2016). The
US should use NGO’s to also help governments ensure a
balanced view of the world in their youth’s educational
programs. Political factors should not influence how future
generations see the world.
The combination of both military and nonmilitary tools should
be used by the US for the overall good of the international
order. Focusing on education, military presence and aid in
training, will give the citizens of states that are surrounded by
terrorist recruitment a better outlook of the world, a more
positive view of their government and military and will
ultimately prevent the growth of terrorism. By focusing on these
factors the US will continue to lead the way in the global
international order.
References
Holestine, Jon. Lesson 8; International Order. American Public
University Systems. 2017.O'Hanlon, Michael E., and Jeremy
Shapiro. "America's Role in the World." Brookings. July 28,
2016. Accessed September 26, 2017.
https://www.brookings.edu/opinions/americas-role-in-the-
world-2/.
"The UN Secretary-General's Global Initiative on Education ."
Can Education Prevent Violent Extremism? | United Nations
Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. 2016.
Accessed September 26, 2017.
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/gefi/stories-events/recent-
stories/2016/can-education-prevent-violent-extremism/.
Response one PH-04
All the model and theories can be applied on different occasions

9. depending on what
the issue is, and we can apply more than one theory or model to
change behavior. I prefer
to use the Health Belief Model which consists of four
constructs. I chose this model because
it focuses on the beliefs and attitudes of people, and you have to
be willing to accept change
to improve health behavior. It is also a step by step model that
enable you to interact with
individual to see their view point on the issue,and ways to
improve their health.The first
construct is to perceived susceptibility is an excellent way to
change health behavior,
when people realize they are at risk for a disease they are likely
to adopt healthy behavior
to decrease risk. Perceived susceptibility in a particular group
of race and ethnic women for
breast and cervical cancer encourages them to get screening
services. The perceived severity
is another way to understand health behavior among the
population. Some women will recognize
the seriousness of breast and cervical cancer due to their belief
or the effect it will have on them.
Others will perceive the severity if they get medical information
and knowledge from physicians.
The third construct is perceived benefits when women decide to
get mammograms and pap
smears to decrease their risk of breast and cervical. Women will
adapt to healthy behavior choice
if they believe it will reduce their risk of developing a disease.
The Health Belief Model last construct
is perceived barrier which is important in determining behavior
change. Women often find it
embarrassing to do breast cancer self-examination and others
refuses to do a pap smear and
mammograms testing because they feel uncomfortable, while

10. others cannot afford the services.
Self-efficacy is also part of Health Belief Model, "is the
individual confidence that he or she
can do something." ( Perrin, pg 58). If women perceive the
benefit of mammograms and
pap-smear but have barriers, they will not even try to do it.
Others who understand the
benefits of mammograms and pap- smear and can overcome
obstacles will improve their
health behavior.
Reference
Perrin, K. (2016) Essential of planning and evaluating for
public health. Theories and Models.
MA Jones & Bartlett Learning
Response two-PH-04
After reading all the theory or model I prefer to use the
ecological model, created back in 1979 by Bronfenbrenner. This
model focus on the social environment and behavior factors.
The ecological model includes five levels. Intrapersonal,
interpersonal, organizational, community and public policy.
Intrapersonal level is when individual is willing to change
attitudes, skill or intention to conform a social norm (Perrin,
2016). Interpersonal relation is based in the influences on an
individual behavior, by friend or colleagues. Organizational
factors, refer to the influence by organization on an individual’s
behavior, such as free flu shots to company employees during
the flu season. Community factor are the organization leader at
the community level who can influence in a positive or negative
in an individual, some example of community are churches and
nonprofit organizations. Finally, public policy is the purpose of
the proposed national and local public policy (Perrin, 2016).
Contrary to the model of PRECEDE-PROCEED Model which is
used for community based program planning, implementation
and evaluation. Is just a guide for individual and long-term
programs. This program is divide in two parts PRECEDE which
is base in what need to be done, and PROCEED determine how

11. to progress to the intervention (Perrin, 2016). The PRECEDE-
PROCEED model is more general, by other hands the ecological
model interacts directly with the individual at different level. In
a recent study combining indoor and outdoor methods for
controlling malaria vector with ecological methods. Show
marked difference across biting ecologies in the efficacy of the
combination of long lasting insecticide nets (LLINs) with
endectocide treated cattle. Using campaign, individual
education and LLINs (Yakob, Cameron & Lines, 2017).
References:
Perrin, K. M. (2016). Essentials of planning and evaluation for
public health. Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Yakob, L., Cameron, M., & Lines, J. (2017). Combining indoor
and outdoor methods for controlling malaria vectors: an
ecological model of endectocide-treated livestock and
insecticidal bed nets. Malaria Journal, 161-10.
doi:10.1186/s12936-017-1748