“Being taken as a slave is better than being killed, no? I don’t see the problem.”
That sentence is a quote taken directly from a cartoon about Christopher Columbus published by the ultra-conservative media organization, PragerU. Founded in 2009, PragerU produces short-form, “educational” content that promotes far-right perspectives, often resorting to misleading information or even outright lies to do so.
In 2021, PragerU unveiled a new TV show for primary school children entitled “Leo and Layla’s History Adventures,” from which the objectionable quote about slavery was sourced. The show stars two time-traveling, cartoon children: a boy (Leo) and his older sister (Layla).
In the show’s episode about Christopher Columbus, Leo and Layla encounter conflicting opinions about the Spanish explorer at school and decide to time-travel to the fifteenth century in order to question him about the validity of his twenty-first-century accusations.
The cartoon Columbus is first asked whether he “spoiled paradise and brought slavery and murder to peaceful people,” to which he responds that “the first [Indigenous] people [I] met were […] peaceful, curious and really helpful; I could […] tell they were highly intelligent.” He claims that he “ordered [his] men to treat them well.”
When Layla poses a question about his involvement in Caribbean slavery, Columbus gives an answer that now lies in internet infamy. He says, “How can you judge me by your standards from the twenty-first century? […] The idea of throwing away the past because of your present values is [stupid]. […] Before you judge, you must ask yourself: what did the culture and society of the past treat as no big deal?”
The cartoon is very convincing and well-written, its deceitful message notwithstanding. With the likeable characters, humor and jaunty music, one hardly notices that nearly every word is a brazen lie and historical inaccuracy about one of history’s most controversial figures.
When Christopher Columbus finally reached land after over five weeks at sea, he arrived on an island in what is now the Bahamas. The Indigenous people who lived on the Caribbean islands before his arrival were called the Taíno people. PragerU was correct in their characterization of the Taíno as “highly intelligent” and their proclamation of Columbus’s respect for the Taíno. Upon his arrival in the Americas, Columbus did indeed remark on how “handsome” and “well-built” the Taíno were. What PragerU conveniently neglected to mention was what he said next: “[The Taíno] do not carry arms. They should [make] good servants.”
Bartolomé de las Casas, a Spanish clergyman, bore witness to Columbus’s savage treatment of the Taíno, the people he ostensibly nursed a fondness for. Columbus ordered his men to “spread terror among the Indians to show them how strong and powerful the Christians were,” a statement in sharp contrast with PragerU’s claim that Columbus told his men to treat the Taínos well. Las Casas wrote that the Spaniards “pitilessly slaughtered [the Taíno] like sheep in a corral.” They would cut off the hands of the Taíno and leave them hanging by a shred of skin. Spaniards would place bets on who could decapitate or slice a Taíno person in half with one swing of a sword.
As if murder and mutilation weren’t bad enough, Christopher Columbus also sent thousands of Taíno people to Spain for use as slaves, some of whom were children. The Taíno who were not sent to Europe were made to work on plantations or in gold mines, and those who tried to revolt were killed, with their bodies being dragged through the streets as a warning for others. As a result of violence and exposure to European diseases to which Native Americans had no resistance, over three million Taíno perished by the early 1500s.
PragerU uses presentism – the idea that it is unfair to judge past events from a modern perspective – as an evasive straw man to defend Columbus’s involvement in the enslavement of Native Americans. In using this argument, PragerU implies that people in the fifteenth century simply didn’t know that slavery was wrong, and that nobody offered any reservations against it, thus making it unreasonable to expect the same from Columbus.
Incidentally, Bartholomé de las Casas, the priest who documented Columbus’s maltreatment of the Taíno, also helps to debunk the presentism argument. A staunch advocate for Native American rights, Las Cases argued that Natives were human beings and dedicated his life to advocating against slavery and persuading the Spanish government to pursue more humane methods of colonization. His efforts resulted in, among other things, the passing of the New Laws of 1542, which improved Native American rights. Surely, if Las Casas could argue against slavery, Columbus could have figured out that it wasn’t “no big deal.”
It may seem like PragerU is an anomaly, a group that represents radical and fringe perspectives. Unfortunately, however, many Americans continue to worship Columbus and treat him as a hero despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary. In a 2024 poll, 52 percent of Americans reported having a “very or somewhat favorable view of Columbus.” Unsurprisingly, on Oct. 9, Donald Trump, a divisive and highly contentious President of the United States, hailed Columbus as “the original American hero” and refused to recognize Indigenous Peoples’ Day, which is celebrated on the same day as Columbus Day, often in place of the latter.
What is the point of a holiday? In my mind, holidays should be opportunities for us to celebrate those who have made positive contributions to the world and can serve as role models for others to follow in their footsteps. Does Christopher Columbus fulfill those requirements? Should we be honoring a man who laid the foundation for the Atlantic Slave Trade and made hobbies out of torture? Is this someone whom we want young children looking up to? While I cannot speak on behalf of my fellow Americans, I personally do not believe that murderers and sadists should have any place on our calendars.
