Session: 1234567891011121314         Page 1234567891011121316171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152535455565758 of 763

had me reading, you know, at three, four. The fact that slavery in the West Indies was in a different social, economic and demographic pattern than slavery in America, -- actually, slavery in the West Indies was almost absentee ownership kind of slavery, where the slaves were the majority, in a sense. And you didn't have the same kind of oppressive, psychologically oppressive pressures associated with slavery in the West Indies as one apparently had in America.

So, the control patterns and forces which American whites used to institute slavery or to make slavery efficient and effective for them were not the same as those used in the West Indies. A very important determinant of the relationship, or factor in the relationship between the European whites in America and the African slaves was a kind of a psychological warfare thing, where, very early, whites felt it necessary to propagate the notion that the Africans were sub-human, you know. And this, I think, reflected among other things the way in which the whites were dealing with their guilt, and also maybe a more direct way of being free to use a variety of controls, to keep the blacks and the slaves in harness

I've just finished reviewing a book which was a critique of Vogel and Engleman's TIME ON THE CROSS, a book by (Herbert G.) Gutman. I think it's going to appear in the TIMES in another week or so. But it's clear that American ways of dealing with slavery were practically unique. Other people had slaves. The ancient Greeks had slaves. But apparently only the Americans were required to try to handle the slavery problem by arguing that the slaves were not quite human. And by doing everything to make this kind of argument real, you know.

You didn't have that, in the West Indies, to my knowledge.