 Leibniz considered some forms of slavery just, insofar as some humans were similar to dumb, ineducable animals, and because slavery is contingent and temporary because life is eternal (Riley, 78). Kant insisted on a sharper animal-human divide, was not sure about immortality, but he considered only the enslavement of criminals just (6: 332–3). American aboriginals and Africans are also described as ‘fit only to be slaves’ (XV:181). The inferior races would die out or be exterminated ( (XV: 878). White, male, Christian Europeans could, he hoped, in time bring civilization to the entire world. Leibniz’s early views were no more savoury; ‘barbarians,’ whom he considered ‘beasts’ (see Perkins, 111), could be destroyed in order to civilize them. Leibniz’s racism reflects the snobbery of the courtier, which is at any rate courteous to women, while the Kantian tendency to pathologize the other flowed rather from an excess of moral fervour and his vigorous antifeminism. True to his rejection of the Principle of Contradiction, Kant saw the human soul as the battleground of animalistic instincts vs. moral duties. Self-indulgence, credulity, and indolence, which were unfortunately built into the character of women and nonEuropeans were to be combated by moral rectitude, education and critique, and industry. 