CIVIL

In “Discourse on Colonialism” Aime Cesaire states “Since, as his fellow Christian, the Rev. Muller, declares: ‘Humanity must not, cannot allow the incompetence, negligence, and laziness of the uncivilized peoples to leave idle the wealth which God has confided to them, charging them to make it serve the good of all’”(39). The “uncivilized” are defined by incompetence, negligence, and laziness which will prevent the spreading of “wealth,”or the materials which could lead to wealth, for the benefit of all. In this way, a justification for colonizing the “uncivilized” arises. Cesaire then goes on to state “What am I driving at? At this idea: that no one colonizes innocently, that no one colonizes with impunity either; that a nation which colonizes, that a civilization which justifies colonization—and therefore force—is already a sick civilization, a civilization which is morally diseased, which irresistibly, progressing from one consequence to another, one denial to another, calls for its Hitler, I mean its punishment”(58). Cesaire responds to the idea of colonizing the “uncivilized” by practically calling colonizers uncivil and morally diseased. 

The idea of civility also appears in Sylvia Tamale’s “Decolonization and Afrofeminism” when she states “During the Atlantic slave economy of the time, the ruling class offered indentured Europeans (de facto slaves) several civil/social privileges that were denied to slaves from Africa on the basis of phenotype. Hence racism results from the fiction of ‘race’ constructed on the basis of pseudo-science to rationalize the double-standard treatment” (4). The idea of civility is developed through the idea of superiority and inferiority in race. Europeans viewed their actions and privileges as more civil/social and therefore denied those privileges to the slaves from Africa because they viewed them as inferior. “Civil” in this sense is a social construct used to limit the opportunities of African slaves. 

NATURE

In John Locke’s “Second Treaties of Government” he states“To understand political power right, and derive it from its original, we must consider, what state all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending upon the will of any other man” (269). The state of nature, which is all men’s state of freedom from the will of any other man, explains what gives a political power legitimacy. This legitimacy only exists while the perfect freedoms of the state of nature also exist. 

“The Principles of Morals and Legislation” by Jeremy Bentham states “Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do, as well as to determine what we shall do” (14). Nature places pain and pleasure onto mankind, which allows nature to eventually determine what we ought to and shall do. 

Aime Cesaire includes a quote about nature in “Discourse on Colonialism” that states “for the sake of the cause, of Descartes’s statement, the charter of universalism, that ‘reason… is found whole and entire in each man,’ and that ‘where individuals of the same species are concerned, there may be degrees in respect of their accidental qualities, but not in respect of their forms, or natures’” (56). In this perspective, the “accidental qualities” of a species may cause differentiation, but the qualities that arise in nature cannot.

EXECEPTION

In Robert Cover’s “Nomos and Narrative” he states “It is tempting to reconcile the stories to the rule by creating exceptions or by positing circumstances that would remove the case from the rule.” Cover uses the word “exceptions” as justification or excuses for certain actions. 

In “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” Peter Singer states “The decisions and actions of human beings can prevent this kind of suffering. Unfortunately, human beings have not made the necessary decisions. At the individual level, people have, with very few exceptions, not responded to the situation in any significant way” (22). Singer uses the word “exceptions” to describe the few that have gone outside of the normative neglective behaviors. 

BARBARISM

Ursula K. Le Guin’s “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas” states that the Omelas citizens “did not use swords, or keep slaves. They were not barbarians” (1).  Later into the story after the suffering child is introduced the story states “They all knew that it had to be true. Some of them understand why, and some do not, but they all understand that their happiness, the beauty of their city…depends wholly on this child’s abdominal misery” (4). The Omelas’ vision of barbarism is direct violence. Even despite their compliance in the child’s suffering and enslavement creating their happiness, the citizens of Omelas do not view themselves as barbaric because they are not physically wielding the weapons that harm the child. 

Aime Cesaire’s “Discourse on Colonialism” has a different view of compliance and how it connects to barbarism. Cesaire states “People are surprised they become indigent. They say: ‘How strange! But never mind- its Naziism, it will pass!’ And they wait, and they hope; and they hide from themselves, that it is barbarism, the supreme barbarism, the crowning barbarism that sums up the daily barbarism; that it was Nazism yes, but that before they were its victims, they were its accomplice” (36). Cesaire describes barbarism as people’s compliance in the harm and suffering of others, specifically the European nations colonization of others. Cesaire also uses “barbarism” to describe a motive of colonization when he states “Colonization: bridgehead in a campaign to civilize barbarism, from which there may emerge at any moment the negation of civilization, pure and simple” (40). 

TYRANNY

Jeremey Bentham, in “The Principles of Morals and Legislation,” states “But this irregularity is presently corrected, when the analysis returns back, as it does after a step or two, into the path from which the tyranny of language had forced it a while to deviate”(215).Tyranny is articulated through the use of unclear language and how it allows for oppression. 

In the “Second Treaties of Government” John Locke states “And thus much may suffice to shew, that as far as we have any light from history, we have reason to conclude, that all peaceful beginnings of government have been laid in the consent of the people. I say peaceful, because I shall have occasion in another place to speak of conquest, which some esteem a way of beginning of governments” (344). Locke states that tyranny is governance without the consent of the people. This also connects to the ongoing theme of colonialism and how it connects to consent in battles for space and materials. 

PARTICIPATION

In Robert Cover’s “Nomos and Narrative” he states “the immediate action required of perfectionists was therefore disengagement from participation in the state. This disengagement did not entail physical or social insularity, but a radical insularity from the normative world alone” (36). Cover uses this section to describe the role participation holds in moral perfectionism. Participation describes the action that upholds roles in the state. This connects to his larger idea that our narratives influence our participation, and is eventually what creates our nomos, or normative universe of right and wrong. Our narratives and participation influence the state and the laws that govern. 

Ying Zhu’s “Moving Bodies Moving Architecture” states “this passing reference to the centrality of ‘participation’ suggests the necessity for visitors to wield energy and force as they devise individual pathways through a memorial site—implicating the body in acts of commemoration” (320). Zhu develops the idea that active participation plays a role in the commemoration found in memorials. Memorial site commemoration is not just something that has meaning solely because it exists but has meaning because of how visitors interact and participate in the memorial itself. 

UNCONTROVERSIAL

In “Famine, Affluence, and Morality” Peter Singer states “This principle seems almost as uncontroversial as the last one. It requires us only to prevent what is bad and not promote what is good” (231). Singer uses the word “uncontroversial” to describe something that we ought to do because it is not demanding. 

Charles W. Mills’s “Ideal Theory as Ideology” states “it is obviously ideal theory in that generic sense, regardless of any divergence in approaches taken. Call this uncontroversial background normative sense of the ideal, with which we will not be concerned: ideal-as-normative” (166). Mills uses the word uncontroversial to describe the certain undertones of idealism in normative and theory. He uses uncontroversial as something inarguable and factual. 

NORMATIVE

In “Nomos and Narrative” Robert Cover states “We inhabit a nomos – a normative universe. We constantly create and maintain a world of right and wrong, of lawful and unlawful, of valid and void” (1). He also states “In this normative world, law and narrative are inseparably related. Every prescription is insistent in its demand to be located in discourse to be supplied with history and destiny, beginning and end, explanation and purpose” (5). Cover states that our “Normative universe “ is our nomos, which is our morality. Our normative is created by our narratives, which are the values of a community. 

Charles W. Mills’s “Ideal Theory as Ideology” states “Since ethics deals by definition with normative/prescriptive/evaluative issues, as against factual/descriptive issues, and so involves the appeal to values and ideals, it is obviously ideal theory in that generic sense, regardless of any divergence in approaches taken. Call this uncontroversial background normative sense of the ideal, with which we will not be concerned: ideal-as-normative” (166). Mills develops the idea of “normative” through ethic’s involvement with ideals. The problems that ethics deals with are normative or idealistic issues, not factual issues.