The publication of a world map by the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE) has brought attention to the political nature of cartography. While some may find it surprising that ideological debates are present in the field of mapping, cartographic projections are always influenced by political choices. When representing a spherical world in two dimensions, decisions must be made on what to prioritize, such as shapes, areas, and angles, as well as which political conventions to adopt.
One famous example of political influence in cartography is the work “Inverted America” by Joaquín Torres García, which places South America as the global north as a symbol of power. Additionally, the choice of the zero meridian passing through the Greenwich Observatory in London as established by an international convention reflects British power at the time, causing tension with France which had its own claim. The United Nations symbol uses an azimuthal projection from the North Pole to avoid favoring any specific country in the central position, but still benefits countries with permanent seats on the Security Council.
In Brazil, a recent edition of IBGE’s School Geographic Atlas sparked controversy by placing Brazil front and center on the world map. This decision was made to showcase Brazil’s role in G20 and highlight Brazilian diplomatic representations around the globe. However, this move caused indignation among Brazilians themselves and revealed how sensitive cartographic representations can be to political influence. The polarization of social networks has now reached even cartography, highlighting how intricate political influence can be in mapping our world.
