Maps and Politics: Why the Way We Draw the World Matters

Maps are more than geographic tools; they reflect and influence political realities. Recent UN support for the Equal Earth projection and President Trump’s renaming of lakes and mountains illustrate how cartographic choices can alter perceptions of size, importance, and national identity.

By Felo News Desk · Published Sun, 20 Sep 2026 22:40:20 GMT

Maps are the everyday lenses through which we view our planet. They anchor us to a place, guide our journeys, and often carry the weight of political claims. Yet the shapes, sizes, and labels we see on a map are not neutral—they are the result of deliberate choices that can reshape how we think about the world.

From Mercator to Equal Earth: The Power of Projection

For centuries, the Mercator projection has dominated the globe. Created in the 16th century for maritime navigation, it stretches landmasses near the poles while shrinking those near the equator. Greenland, for example, appears larger than Africa, even though Africa is roughly 14 times bigger. This distortion has long been a source of contention, especially for regions that feel misrepresented on the world stage.

In a landmark vote this month, the United Nations General Assembly endorsed a new map using the Equal Earth projection—a design that preserves relative land area. The decision, supported by 164 member states, was a clear statement that the international community wants a more accurate visual representation of our planet. Only six countries abstained, and the United States was the sole opponent.

Political Cartography in the Age of Digital Maps

Beyond the choice of projection, the naming of geographic features is a powerful political tool. In August 2023, President Donald Trump signed an executive order renaming Lake Ontario to “Lake America” amid a trade dispute with Canada. A similar directive in January 2025 renamed the Gulf of Mexico as the “Gulf of America.” Major tech companies such as Google and Apple incorporated these changes into their U.S. mapping services, while Canada and MapQuest resisted.

These actions illustrate how maps can be used to assert sovereignty or influence public perception. When a nation’s name is attached to a body of water, it signals ownership and can shift the narrative about who has the right to use or benefit from that resource.

Cartography as a Time Capsule

Maps also serve as snapshots of a particular era. The definition of “United States” has evolved over 250 years, reflecting changes in territory, governance, and ideology. Tony Rodono, owner of The Map Shop in Charlotte, North Carolina, notes that every map is a “time capsule” of its creator’s worldview and the historical context in which it was produced.

Trump’s renaming of Denali back to Mount McKinley in Alaska further demonstrates how cartographic decisions can be used to rewrite history. The mountain’s name change was a reversal of the Obama administration’s effort to honor the indigenous name, highlighting how maps can become battlegrounds for cultural and political identity.

Why Map Choices Matter

Distortions and naming decisions are not merely academic; they have real-world consequences. When Africa is depicted as a smaller continent, its political and economic influence can be undervalued. Conversely, a map that accurately represents Africa’s size can elevate its status in global discussions about trade, climate change, and development.

Alex Moulton, an assistant professor at Hunter College, argues that “maps structure our politics in ways that then have consequences.” The way we visualize the world shapes our perceptions of power, resource distribution, and national identity. As such, cartographic decisions are inherently political.

In short, maps are not neutral representations; they are tools that can reinforce or challenge existing power structures. Whether through the choice of projection, the naming of features, or the inclusion of certain territories, the way we draw the world influences how we think about it.

As the debate over map accuracy and political representation continues, it is crucial for policymakers, educators, and the public to remain aware of the underlying choices that shape our visual understanding of the planet.

Key facts

The UN endorsed the Equal Earth projection to correct size distortions.
Trump’s orders renamed major water bodies, sparking international debate.
Map projections like Mercator distort land size, affecting political perception.
Cartographic choices reflect cultural and historical contexts.
Accurate maps support fair global discussions on trade and climate.
Naming changes can rewrite national narratives and influence sovereignty claims.

Why it matters

Maps influence how we perceive geography, power, and identity. Misrepresentations can perpetuate bias, while accurate depictions promote informed decision‑making and equitable policy.

Frequently asked questions

What is the Equal Earth projection?

It’s a map design that preserves the relative area of land masses, offering a more accurate visual representation of the world compared to traditional projections like Mercator.

Why did the United States oppose the UN vote on the new map?

The U.S. government expressed concerns that the new projection might alter the traditional visual narrative of the world, potentially impacting geopolitical perceptions.

How do tech companies decide which map names to use?

Companies often follow official government orders or international standards, but they may also consider user feedback and legal requirements.

Can a map change political power?

Yes; the way a map represents territory can influence perceptions of size, importance, and sovereignty, which in turn can affect diplomatic relations and policy decisions.