site banner
PaperclipPerfector  7hr ago (text post)   175 thread views

Transnational Thursday for September 10, 2026

Transnational Thursday is a thread for people to discuss international news, foreign policy or international relations history. Feel free as well to drop in with coverage of countries you’re interested in, talk about ongoing dynamics like the wars in Israel or Ukraine, or even just whatever you’re reading.

Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Front-page news on Reddit: The United Nations General Assembly has adopted a resolution recommending the Equal Earth projection (pseudocylindrical, equal-area) over the Mercator projection (cylindrical, conformal). This is the culmination of a campaign that has been backed by the African Union for the past year.

The General Assembly

[Two pages of preamble]

(1) Affirms that cartographic distortions of continental sizes inherited from history have cognitive, educational, cultural, geopolitical and socioeconomic impacts and constitute historical biases, the correction of which will promote recognition, justice and development, particularly with regard to the African continent;

(2) Recognizes that the Mercator projection, widely used around the world, particularly distorts, from the perspective of area representation, continental masses located far from the equator, resulting in a proportional shrinkage of Africa and other regions;

(3) Declares that the Equal Earth cartographic projection offers a more accurate representation of the sizes of continental landmasses and to this end is a relevant option for improving the accuracy of the cartographic representation of the world;

[Two pages of "emphasizing", "encouraging", "inviting", and "urging"]

The resolution does not actually require the Equal Earth Projection to be used, even internally at the UN.

Vote summary:

VoteCount
Yes164
No1 (USA)
Abstain6
(Not present)22

Comparison between cylindrical equal-area projection (Behrmann variant) and Equal Earth projection:

OutputCylindrical equal-areaEqual Earth
Notes—θ = asin(√(3)/2⋅sin(φ))
A1 = 1.340264
A2 = −0.081106
A3 = 0.000893
A4 = 0.003796
x√(3)/2⋅λ2√(3)λcos(θ)/(27A4θ8 + 21A3θ6 + 9A2θ2 + 3A1)
y2/√(3)⋅sin(φ)A4θ9 + A3θ7 + A2θ3 + A1θ
ShapeFamiliar rectangleWeird dirigible
Verdict♥️🤮

Previous discussion of map projections

(If you hate all map projections and want to pretend that you're looking at a physical globe, use the orthographic projection—or, if you're really deviant, the general perspective projection.)

Kavrayskiy VII is the best compromise projection:

x = (3λ/2)⋅√(1/3-(φ/π)2)
y = φ

I'll accept Wagner VI too, which is simply a slightly wider version of K7:

x = λ⋅√(1-3(φ/π)2)
y = φ

Kavrayskiy VII is the best compromise projection

Yes, Comrade Kavrayskiy VII is clearly the most principled compromise projection. Winkel tripel and the National Geographic Society are bourgeois nonsense.

I was going to come in here and make a nostalgia argument for a Winkel tripel, but Kavrayskiy VII is clearly more aesthetic, which, re: the original discussion, is the most important property for all these maps. It doesn't make sense to me why area should be the key ontological factor for deciding which map is best. In the modern era, no one is cutting out sections of map to weigh them, or measuring border lengths with a string, or trying to find the rhumb line with a ruler; at least not for serious work and not from a random UN report. If you want to compare areas, clearly a bar chart or a table would be better.

It doesn't make sense to me why area should be the key ontological factor for deciding which map is best.

The General Assembly says:

Emphasizing that cartographic representations constitute an essential component of geospatial information and have a lasting influence on the perception and understanding of territorial realities on a global scale,

Considering that maps constitute a fundamental educational, scientific and cultural tool that shapes the perception of the world and the collective imagination of peoples,

Recalling the Charter for African Cultural Renaissance, in particular article 3 relating to the rehabilitation and enhancement of African heritage,

Recognizing that certain cartographic distortions of sizes of continents, inherited from history, have contributed to their incorrect perceptions, leading in particular to a symbolic minimization of Africa in collective imaginations and knowledge systems,

leading in particular to a symbolic minimization of Africa in collective imaginations and knowledge systems

Yes, because placing Africa centrally in the most common default maps was a conspiracy to minimize the importance of Africa.

Edit: I realize I should probably have made a clearer point. I am aware of the general argument for why the African Union is arguing for an equal-area projection to be "encouraged." I do not find it convincing that area is the only factor in visual prominence, or that area alone should be the only factor for determining if a map introduces undesirable bias or will promote justice. I seriously think the map being aesthetic is more important, and that quantitative comparisons have better forms. I also think developed-country elementary school classrooms can afford and should have a globe available. Preferably a planimetric globe that can be dismounted from its stand and rotated freely to examine.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats