passed with the support of 164 nations, including France and the UK. The United States was the only nation to vote against it
me when I am america and an opportunity presents itself to be antagonistic for no reason
this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2026
67 points (100.0% liked)
World News
2409 readers
865 users here now
Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.
Other Great Communities:
Rules
Be excellent to each other
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
In March, the US was also critical when a resolution was adopted declaring the transatlantic slave trade "the gravest crime against humanity".
Typical USA.
He had the backing of the French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot, who said his ministry was going to stop using the Mercator map.
Hmm, use it for what, exactly? In the present, nobody is using these maps for navigation, and hopefully not for any serious geography study beyond say the history of cartography... so I guess mostly lower-level education purposes? That's important, the way we teach children to think about the world certainly matters.
"Changing the map obviously doesn't change the world. But correcting a representation that distorts it is already an act of truth," he said.
The pedantic part of me wants to point out that every projection of a 3D object onto a 2D surface requires distortion, especially in a case like this where the entire surface area of the object is shown on a single unbroken plane. At some level, describing one projection as better than another is akin to saying that one way of drawing a cube on a sheet of paper is better than another. More important than picking a winner is having the discussion about the limitations of all forms of projection and how they affect our perceptions, in all subject areas.
If there is a real benefit to making a change like this, it's in provoking those discussions.
Besides, we all know the Waterman Butterfly is superior:
The pedantic part of me wants to point out that every projection of a 3D object onto a 2D surface requires distortion
They literally say that in the article.
The distortion of his map is a result of the fact that it is impossible to accurately represent the surface of a globe on a two-dimensional chart. Whenever a map of the world is drawn, compromises need to be made.
Right, so then why are they describing this as "correcting" the distortion, when in fact it is simply choosing a different version of distortion?
Did you read the article? I think your questions/complaints are answered there.
Tldr; the new map solves some distortions (to the tune of 14x) but also there’s a human element to this. It seems like an obvious and overdue improvement.
Retaining an inferior map because they won’t be used for navigation is an odd defence.
In the present, nobody is using these maps for navigation
Took a big whiff of the copium, did you?