By Matt Underwood OK Rep. defends history cartoon claiming slavery was ‘better than being killed’ is a truly disheartening headline, isn’t it? It’s the kind of statement that makes you question the very foundations of historical understanding and basic human decency. The fact that a public official would defend a narrative that frames slavery as a preferable outcome is not just wrong, it’s a profound betrayal of the values this nation claims to hold.
It appears this defense stems from a cartoon series aimed at children, a partnership between the Oklahoma State Department of Education and PragerU. This is particularly concerning, given the influence such content can have on young, impressionable minds. The series, “Leo & Layla’s History Adventures,” apparently tackles the complexities of history, specifically the legacy of Christopher Columbus. The cartoon’s depiction seems to suggest that slavery, in Columbus’s words, was “better than being killed.”
One can’t help but wonder, where is the critical thinking? Where is the empathy? The cartoon’s defense of slavery is particularly egregious when contrasted with the experiences of enslaved people. There is a wealth of documented evidence that details the brutality, the suffering, and the systematic dehumanization inherent in slavery. The notion that it was, in any way, a preferable alternative to death is a deeply offensive distortion of history. Consider the documented accounts of the high infant mortality rates among enslaved children, often linked to undernourishment, and the psychological toll of separation from families. These are just a few snapshots of the horrors that render the “better than death” argument entirely baseless.
The cartoon also brushes aside the context of the time, portraying Columbus as not wanting to be judged by modern standards, comparing him to the Ancient Greeks. This is a dangerous oversimplification. While it’s true that societies change and evolve, the core principles of human rights, autonomy, and dignity have always been essential. Slavery was wrong then, and it is unequivocally wrong now. It should never be framed as a less unfavorable option.
The narrative presented in this cartoon is also likely designed to downplay the atrocities of the Atlantic slave trade and the broader history of systemic oppression in the United States. The fact that some individuals would argue that slavery could be seen as preferable to death is an insult to the memory of those who suffered and died under its barbarity. It’s crucial to remember that for many slaves, death was a preferable option. Accounts detail slaves jumping from ships to avoid the dehumanization of slavery.
The situation is made worse by the political context. The alignment of the Oklahoma Department of Education with PragerU, a conservative platform, raises further concerns about the potential for political indoctrination in the classroom. The promotion of a curriculum that defends or minimizes the horrors of slavery is a clear example of historical revisionism. The emphasis on “mystery” rather than real history is a clear attempt to push a nationalist, right-wing agenda.
This defense of slavery seems to be rooted in a desire to rewrite history to protect the feelings of a certain group. The truth is that those who defend the enslavers are equally guilty of the same. As someone pointed out, it was never a matter of slavery versus death. It was a matter of Africans being treated as property from the moment of their capture. The horrors that awaited the enslaved are well documented. It’s a history of torture, inhumane living conditions, and brutal exploitation. There were revolts. There was resistance. To reduce it to a simple dichotomy of “slavery or death” is not only historically inaccurate, it’s a profound insult to the resilience and humanity of those who endured it.
The response by the OK Rep. seems to be a symptom of something larger: a dangerous trend towards historical revisionism and the politicization of education. The focus on patriotism and downplaying the atrocities committed in the name of nation-building is a recurring theme. We must be vigilant in our efforts to counter such narratives, to ensure that children learn an accurate and comprehensive understanding of history, and to hold those who perpetuate this revisionism accountable.