SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Which is larger? Yours, or mine? Australia or the United States of America, that is. With the bushfires in Australia out of control incinerating large swathes of the country a map was produced to visually depict how widespread the fires are. For emphasis the map was overlaid on top of America to give people an idea of the scope of the problem Australia is dealing with. Americans responded with disbelief that Australia was just as large as the USA. People were also in shock over how large an area, measured by size of US states, are currently burning. Responses on social media show how shocked and dumbfounded people were learning this.
- Area of Australia = 7.692 million km2
- Area of USA, excluding Alaska = 7.653 million km2
Here is the image under discussion.
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Australian Bushfire Map Superimosed Over America Sows Disbelief
|
Log In/Create an Account
| Top
| 76 comments
| Search Discussion
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
New crypt. See /usr/news/crypt.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by kazzie on Wednesday January 08 2020, @10:26AM (2 children)
You could argue that it was easier for Britain to get rid of slavery, because employing slaves wasn't as key a part of their economy as is was for the United States. (Britain had been a big player in the capture and trade of slaves and their transportation over the Atlantic. It was this practice that was banned in 1807; slavery itself remained legal for another three decades or so.)
There's a certain contrast between the distance between Westminster and the places where slaves worked, and the degree of concern that was shown by anti-slavery campaigners in the UK in the 18th and 19th centuries. Perhaps there was a desire to be seen as benevolent "masters" of their empire?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Phoenix666 on Wednesday January 08 2020, @01:55PM (1 child)
Well, Britain stood at the most sanitized and profitable apex of the triangle trade. They conveniently ignored the suffering and oppression their standard of living depended on in exactly the same way that modern Europeans, Americans, Japanese, and other first world nations do. How many woke iPhone owners put them down in disgust over the slave and child labor and environmental degradation (elsewhere, far away) that went into producing them? None, that's how many.
It's the same dynamic that every empire has depended on.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by kazzie on Wednesday January 08 2020, @05:23PM
My point is that the British Empire did become disgusted by slavery, but specifically the hell-hole conditions in which slaves were transported across the seas. William Wilberforce and his fellow campaigners were able to get more outrage at this than the mere keeping of slaves.