this isn't comparative geography if it isn't actively adjusting the mercator projection. the distortion of canada here appears to not be corrected. this is not an accurate statement due to the extreme stretching of the mercator projection near the poles.
Canada shrank by like three times when I pulled it down and I did the math to double-check: the distance between the northern mainland shore and the tippy top of that island extending beyond the map is 1,800 kms, from the northern shore to the US border is 2,000 kms, so pulling the southern border of Canada to the southern US border would still extend the northern Canadian islands into mainland northern Canada
Had more than 3,700 kms to play with in total, from North Dakota to the Rio Grande is only 2,000 km, damn that country is big
can't argue with that then.
case in point, if this is done correctly, one can see for example that greenland and mexico are very similar sizes.
I can't help but think a serious country (not Canada) would be pouring money into its far north, if not just for the sake of the communities of Indigenous people who they've seized the land from, but because it would be economically forward thinking. Just look at the work and resources Russia is putting into their North Sea trade route, Canada should be doing the same.
The northern infrastructure in my province is beyond lacking, you can't even reach northernmost population centers by road. Meanwhile there are still hundreds upon hundreds of KM of "Canada" north of that. Serious countries who control vast swathes north of the arctic circle would be at minimum building rail connections and deep water ports at this point, one would think.
So, the conclusion here is... Canada is a little taller than the US.
I mean, sure?
just flip it horizontally
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Gossip posts go in c/gossip. Don't post low-hanging fruit here after it gets removed from c/gossip
