Are Mercator Map Projections a Tool of White Supremacy(tm)

[Eparkhos]

I was on AH.com yesterday when I came across this glorious wall of text:

One of the many ugly things about systemic racism is that people can perpetuate it without necessarily having any sort of hateful agenda. Bias can be reinforced through absent-mindedness. That's why we need to think critically about the tools and structures we create, and listen to the people who are most affected by it.

Imagine that you are a teacher, with a map displayed on your classroom wall. A group of students come to you after class and express that they find the map insulting, since it marginalizes their homelands and emphasizes the homelands of people who have been pillaging their homelands for centuries and telling their people that they are inferior. Without the historical context, it might seem like they are making a mountain out of molehill, but when the map comes as part of a package of hundreds of years of dehumanization and exploitation, it re-opens those wounds. So, what would you do as the teacher. Would you tell them that they are wrong to be offended, since the map was build for navigation, even though it's sitting on the wall of a classroom, not in front of the steering wheel of a ship? Are you saying that having a navigational map on the wall is more important than challenging structural racism and creating an inclusive learning environment?

And if you're worried that the group of students who approached you are not representative of the diversity of students, then invite more students and teachers to the discussion. Have a conversation about maps and other displays on the walls, and what their effect is, regardless of intentions. And in this discussion, it is absolutely essential to remember that the classroom doesn't exist in a vacuum, it is embedded in a society that is saturated with racism at so many levels. We can change that, and we have to. And we aren't going to get there by dismissing criticism with "it wasn't intentional" or "it's good for navigation".

When someone points out a mistake that you made without meaning to, and you agree that the it was a mistake and you shouldn't have done it, does it make sense to keep on doing this thing because, well, the first time you did it, it was an accident? No. It makes sense to stop doing the problematic behavior now that you've been made aware of it. An unintentional wrongdoing becomes deliberate when you keep doing despite being alerted to its wrongfulness. As for adding fuel to the fire, that brings to mind a certain quote:

“Sometimes, when a person’s house is on fire and someone comes in yelling fire, instead of the person who is awakened by the yell being thankful, he makes the mistake of charging the one who awakened him with having set the fire.”
- Malcolm X [1]

So, I leave you with this question, am I adding fuel to the fire, or am I drawing your attention to a fire that is already raging, so that together we can put it out and rebuild the house so that it will no longer incinerate its own residents?

[1] Source: "Judas and the Black Messiah", quoted in The Michigan Daily. ‘Judas and the Black Messiah’ says screw the neoliberals | The Michigan Daily February 10, 2021.

The user essentially states that a) the Mercator Projection is a tool of white supremacy, b) anyone who doesn't immediately remove any copy of it at the behest of a wholesome group of BIPOC or 'post-colonial citizens' (their words from another post) is themselves a white supremacist, and c) anyone who opposes the removal of this projection is either a white supremacist or has internalized racism.

I've seen this user in the past--I'm not sure about this site's rules on brigading, but the transistor's name is MB, for future reference--and their MO is making ridiculously baseless accusations of racism/prejudice against anyone who disagrees with them. I can't prove it, but it seems that the mods are at least aware that this is happening, as everyone who is the target of such an incident has some sort of action taken against them. I had to cut my response short because I don't want to get banned, but I'm probably staring down a kick as is.

So, do you agree with MB? Is the Mercator Projection a tool of white supremacy?

 

[PsihoKekec]

Everything is racism. Honestly I prefer living in evil white patriarchy society with all the perks of civilization than in post-colonial stone age society that they strive for.

 

[Arlos]

I was on AH.com yesterday when I came across this glorious wall of text:



The user essentially states that a) the Mercator Projection is a tool of white supremacy, b) anyone who doesn't immediately remove any copy of it at the behest of a wholesome group of BIPOC or 'post-colonial citizens' (their words from another post) is themselves a white supremacist, and c) anyone who opposes the removal of this projection is either a white supremacist or has internalized racism.

I've seen this user in the past--I'm not sure about this site's rules on brigading, but the transistor's name is MB, for future reference--and their MO is making ridiculously baseless accusations of racism/prejudice against anyone who disagrees with them. I can't prove it, but it seems that the mods are at least aware that this is happening, as everyone who is the target of such an incident has some sort of action taken against them. I had to cut my response short because I don't want to get banned, but I'm probably staring down a kick as is.

So, do you agree with MB? Is the Mercator Projection a tool of white supremacy?

We need an eye rolls reaction choice...

 

[Jormungandr]

Well, I guess I'm a White Supremacist, then?

Sieg Heil, fellow Whites! We'll sure dominate the "lesser races" with our... maps.

Um.

(Yes, to any Leftards out there salivating at this post, I am being sarcastic about being a White Supremacist).

 

[Circle of Willis]

Are you saying that having a navigational map on the wall is more important than challenging structural racism and creating an inclusive learning environment?

Yes.

 

[LordsFire]

When your worldview is dependent on structural racism existing always and in all places, you will always find it, even when it isn't there.

 

[Navarro]

Especially as the Mercator Projection most exaggerates Greenland, Antarctica and the northern Canadian islands ...

 

[Laskar]

A: Mercator has a projection biased towards areas that were of commercial interest at the time, because it was a commercial map.
B: The replacement projections are just terrible, especially the ones that harp the most about Mercator being supremacist and this new map being fair and equitable. I'm looking at you, Peters.

 

[Sir 1000]

Retard alert! Retard alert! Retard alert! Why do so many wokeists consider these ''people'' human instead of taking them at face value as a hate filled invading army? Is the propaganda that strong?

 

[ShadowArxxy]

From a map-and-math geek point of view:

When you translate a three-dimensional globe to a two-dimensional flat map of large scale, there's a fundamental tradeoff between accuracy in shape, accuracy in area, and the mathematical complexity of the translation. That last factor is why the better projections that map geeks tend to fan-squee over didn't exist earlier in history; for the most part, they're more complex topological transforms and thus were in practical terms beyond the reach of historical cartographers to actually generate.

The Mercator Projection was designed for seafaring navigation, not classrooms. In a Mercator projection, the east-west stretching of the map which is inherent to any cylindrical projection is exactly matched by intentional north-south stretching, which means that angles are perfectly preserved at all locations, at the cost of areas being distorted. In addition, with this projection a straight line on the two-dimensional map is equivalent to a constant-bearing loxodrome (a.k.a. a rhumb), which is *very* useful for plotting courses for a ship.

Note that Mercator himself -- the actual mapmaker -- considered this to be a specialized projection which was unsuitable for general world maps; the general world maps he made used a sinusoidal projection, which preserves area over shape. However, the Mercator's characteristics made it the most popular navigational map, and the wide availability produced by that popularity led to it becoming the predominant general map despite its actually specialized nature.

-----

Note that arguing about meaningful accuracy in flat projection maps vastly predates modern social justice arguments; it's one of the fundamental constraints on map cartography, it's the *entire reason* more than one map projection exists, and *Mercator himself* was of the professional judgement that area-accuracy was more important than shape-accuracy in a general purpose world map.

 

[Eparkhos]

From a map-and-math geek point of view:

When you translate a three-dimensional globe to a two-dimensional flat map of large scale, there's a fundamental tradeoff between accuracy in shape, accuracy in area, and the mathematical complexity of the translation. That last factor is why the better projections that map geeks tend to fan-squee over didn't exist earlier in history; for the most part, they're more complex topological transforms and thus were in practical terms beyond the reach of historical cartographers to actually generate.

The Mercator Projection was designed for seafaring navigation, not classrooms. In a Mercator projection, the east-west stretching of the map which is inherent to any cylindrical projection is exactly matched by intentional north-south stretching, which means that angles are perfectly preserved at all locations, at the cost of areas being distorted. In addition, with this projection a straight line on the two-dimensional map is equivalent to a constant-bearing loxodrome (a.k.a. a rhumb), which is *very* useful for plotting courses for a ship.

Note that Mercator himself -- the actual mapmaker -- considered this to be a specialized projection which was unsuitable for general world maps; the general world maps he made used a sinusoidal projection, which preserves area over shape. However, the Mercator's characteristics made it the most popular navigational map, and the wide availability produced by that popularity led to it becoming the predominant general map despite its actually specialized nature.

-----

Note that arguing about meaningful accuracy in flat projection maps vastly predates modern social justice arguments; it's one of the fundamental constraints on map cartography, it's the *entire reason* more than one map projection exists, and *Mercator himself* was of the professional judgement that area-accuracy was more important than shape-accuracy in a general purpose world map.

I agree with your assessment of the maps. I myself favor the Winkel III.

 

[AnimalNoodles]

I hope they do start using other projections, because once people see just how much bigger Africa is than Europe, it may cause some reevaluations.

 

[Robovski]

I mean, you can get a globe if it bothers you.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

To continue the map geekery:

So, the fundamental tradeoff between shape accuracy and area accuracy is a *mathematical factor* which means that ultimately, no map projection is "objectively" better than any other map projection in absolute terms; they all have to make these fundamental tradeoffs, and *which* tradeoffs are made is a function of what the purpose of a given map projection is. I previously said that more complex topological transforms are "better" projections, but it's really more accurate to say that the modern ability to easily compute and print more complex transforms allows for new, potentially more flexible compromises. More complex transforms do not change the fact that to convert a spherical reality into a flat map, something has to be distorted, one way or another.

What does any of this have to do with social justice?

That can be almost entirely blamed on one guy, an obscure German historian / filmmaker by the name of Arno Peters. In 1974, Peters introduced the Peters World Map, which he claimed was a new projection he had invented that was the most accurate representation of the world and that it was the only map not guilty of "cartographic imperialism" in emphasizing Europe over the rest of the world, and furthermore that it was the first and only world map to be "area correct", to have "absolute angle conformality", "no extreme distortions of form", and "total distance factuality". This was, of course, complete bullshit; as we just discussed, it is in fact mathematically impossible for a flat projection map to have more than one of these characteristics, and the Peters map actually has none of them. Moreover, the Peters map isn't even his own projection; it is a copy of Gall's orthographic projection from 1855. Unfortunately, Peters was very good at self-publicity, which meant that even when his plagiarism was discovered, the map is generally referred to as the "Gall-Peters projection".

In short: "cartographic imperialism" in the sense that Peters claimed is not a thing, because his claims that professional cartographers ignore these issues because of their Euro-centric mindset is a complete lie just like every other claim he made about "his" map. The Gall-Peters projection is a terrible (and plagiarized) amateur map projection which literally serves no goddamn purpose other than profiting this pompous asshole, and should be ignored by everyone regardless of politics.

TL;DR:

xckd.

 

[Jeff Thomas]

So we should round up a bunch of people who think our maps are racist, arm them with whatever they want to use for maps and drop them in the middle of the ocean. They can see how long it takes them to get somewhere.

A number of years ago I saw a book of WWII maps, with south at the top. The idea was that it forced the viewer to look at the war in new ways. I found that even looking at something relatively easy and familiar (The Battle of Midway) I couldn't read it.

I just googled "non-racist map" and found this: 'It's a gimmick': There's more to your world map than meets the eye I'll leave you to form your own conclusions.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

So we should round up a bunch of people who think our maps are racist, arm them with whatever they want to use for maps and drop them in the middle of the ocean. They can see how long it takes them to get somewhere.

Given that the Mercator is designed for ocean navigation, it's a rather slanted test to argue that better choices for the general purpose / classroom map role should be compared by ocean navigation.

I just googled "non-racist map" and found this: 'It's a gimmick': There's more to your world map than meets the eye I'll leave you to form your own conclusions.

Looking at different map projections and parameterizations is a useful tool for many things. As a certain famous work of science fiction put it, "the enemy's gate is down".

Professional cartographers do take these things into account when they design a map to do a job. The "standard" Mercator projection is the most useful map for a sea captain sailing potentially anywhere, but primarily navigating the Atlantic. That is literally what it was made for. An alternate Mercator with the Pacific in the middle would be the most useful map for a different sea captain who was also sailing potentially anywhere, but primarily navigating the Pacific.

Neither map has a moral value, but it *does* have a cultural viewpoint built into its functional design.

 

[Jormungandr]

Especially as the Mercator Projection most exaggerates Greenland, Antarctica and the northern Canadian islands ...

Ah, so the true master race isn't whites but Canadian Geese.

...Those fuckers!

You could be as white as chalk, black as the ace of spades, as Asian as a racist cartoon from the 50's, or blue with green fucking spots on your skin/a lizard person like Hillary Clinton: you're all the same to those avian bastards.

 

[ShadowArxxy]

Especially as the Mercator Projection most exaggerates Greenland, Antarctica and the northern Canadian islands ...

The Mercator Projection's hyper-exaggeration of the very far north and very far south actually makes it useless for navigating in those areas; the distortion causes the scale of the map to expand towards infinitely-large at the poles, so specialized area maps are required. The Mercator is generally usable from the 70th parallel north to the 70th parallel south, a range judged the most useful compromise for *most* sea navigation in its day.

A: Mercator has a projection biased towards areas that were of commercial interest at the time, because it was a commercial map.

As I said, it's more specific than that. The features of the Mercator projection are aimed specifically at sea navigation. Mercator's own general interest maps used equal-area sinusoidal projection rather than the cylindrical projection which famously bears his name.

B: The replacement projections are just terrible, especially the ones that harp the most about Mercator being supremacist and this new map being fair and equitable. I'm looking at you, Peters.

Peters was not even remotely trying to actually be fair and equitable, he was trying to *sell his map*. Which was actually a plagiarized copy of Galls' map.

Again, literally every single claim Peters makes about "his" map and about cartographers was blatantly false and in bad faith.

 

[GoldRanger]

B: The replacement projections are just terrible, especially the ones that harp the most about Mercator being supremacist and this new map being fair and equitable. I'm looking at you, Peters.

I googled Peter's projection. What the fuck? That map is completely unusable. Russia and Canada are so squashed and distorted that it's impossible to pinpoint any actual locations in them.

 

[GoldRanger]

I just googled "non-racist map" and found this: 'It's a gimmick': There's more to your world map than meets the eye I'll leave you to form your own conclusions.

This is a bunch of horseshit. North is up, because it's the magnetic North which we used as a navigational reference. That's it.