By Matt Underwood The African Union is advocating for a shift in how the world sees itself, specifically by urging the adoption of a world map that accurately reflects the continent’s true size. It’s a conversation starter, no doubt, sparking debates about representation, perspective, and what really matters.
It’s important to understand that the map we commonly use, the Mercator projection, has its roots in navigation. It’s incredibly useful for sailors because it preserves shapes and angles, making it ideal for plotting courses. However, this projection does a number on the relative sizes of landmasses. Areas closer to the poles, like Greenland, appear significantly larger than they actually are, while areas closer to the equator, like Africa, get comparatively squished.
The core of the African Union’s argument seems to be about reclaiming a sense of global position, advocating for a map that gives a more accurate depiction of Africa’s substantial size. It’s a reasonable request, especially when considering the potential impact of distorted maps on how we perceive global power dynamics. Some see the Mercator projection as reinforcing historical biases, making it seem like certain regions are more dominant due to their inflated size on the map. It’s like looking at a funhouse mirror – a familiar image, but the distortion subtly changes your perception.
Now, let’s be clear: the Mercator projection isn’t some kind of nefarious plot. It’s a tool, and it has its strengths. But, and this is a significant ‘but,’ it’s not the only way to represent the world. There are other projections that prioritize different aspects, like the Equal Earth projection, which the article mentions. The key is to understand that every map projection involves some compromise; you can’t perfectly flatten a sphere without distorting something, be it shape, area, or distance. Globes, of course, offer the most accurate representation, but aren’t as portable or user-friendly as flat maps.
One of the main concerns is that focusing on a map’s distortions feels like a misdirection. Some argue that the African Union should direct its efforts towards more pressing issues such as corruption or other societal problems. There’s definitely a sense that the world has bigger problems to solve than the choice of map.
There’s another point of view: that of simple practicality. Navigators rely on the Mercator projection, and other projections that prioritize area or even aesthetics may be less functional for their purposes. But, the reality is that people use globes, and alternative projections, like the Equal Earth projection, and that they are able to get access to accurate representations.
It’s crucial to remember that how we see the world is about more than just geography. Maps shape our understanding of power, resources, and the relationships between nations. Adopting a map that gives a more accurate representation of Africa’s true size could subtly shift perceptions. But ultimately, what the African Union is calling for is not just a map change, but a change in perspective, a reevaluation of how we understand our world and the place of Africa within it.