Talk:The Racial Contract

I deleted the reference to the Mises Institute for two reasons: (1) that passage suggested that "some" people were critical of the book, but the Mises Review is only one entity; (2), more importantly, the Mises Review is obviously ideologically motivated and isn't a reliable source (arguably, its criticism is actually a support of Mills' argument).

Suggested correction: We should remove the reference to the "3/5 compromise" wherein Africans living in the United States were counted as 3/5 of a person. This is because it had nothing to do with race per say, it had to do with districting issues. It was racist Southern plantation owners who wanted full representation of black slaves and thus to consider them "5/5" a person would have deepened the power of racist landowners in the Southern United States. Considering them as "3/5" was the work of abolitionists who did not want the south to have more representation and thus more power to prolong the institution of slavery. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.60.182.124 (talk) 01:11, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Original research
The article has the appearance of a school paper rather than an encyclopedic article. The sections on Social Contract and Implications, especially, do not reference any sources to support the statements being made there. If we cannot find secondary sources to support what we're presenting or we should delete it. Joja lozzo  00:16, 1 January 2015 (UTC)


 * This book had a fairly large reception (for a philosophy book) when it was published, and academic sources with substantial coverage of it certainly exist, so we shouldn't be looking to delete the article. Having said that, I agree the current article is basically a book report, and needs more references to secondary sources. AdamPronouncedAdam (talk) 16:35, 22 June 2023 (UTC)