Is any geo-strategic factor more influential in the success of nations than the quality of maps?
>>277775
DEFINE "SUCCESS OF NATIONS".
>>277778
Economic prosperity and military victory
>>277786
REGARDING "ECONOMIC PROSPERITY", MAPS ARE NOT REQUISITE, NOR NECESSARY AT ALL.
REGARDING "MILITARY VICTORY", MAPS ARE MERELY A MODEL, SO TOPOGRAPHICAL ACCURACY, AND GEOGRAPHICAL ACCURACY, ARE RELEVANT ONLY TO THE LOGISTIC, AND TACTICAL, ASPECTS OF WARFARE, BUT NOT SO MUCH FOR STRATEGY, OR GEOPOLITICS.
>>277775
>geo-strategic factor
Define this term.
>>277801
>REGARDING "ECONOMIC PROSPERITY", MAPS ARE NOT REQUISITE, NOR NECESSARY AT ALL.
>GOODS SIMPLY WALK TO WHERE THEY ARE NEEDED ALONG PSYCHO-MAGNETIC LEY LINES
>>277920
IF YOU BELIEVE THAT "ECONOMIC PROSPERITY" IS SOLELY, OR PRIMARILY, DEPENDENT ON THE MOBILITY OF "GOODS", YOU ARE IGNORANT, OR A MORON.
THE MOST RELEVANT FACTOR; THE MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR, FOR "ECONOMIC PROSPERITY" IS AN OPTIMAL ECONOMIC SYSTEM, REGARDLESS OF THE LOGISTICS OF "'GOODS' MOBILITY" —IN THE WORST OF CASES, IN WHICH NAVIGATION VIA MAP MAY BE IMPOSSIBLE, "GOODS" WOULD STILL BE MOBILE, ALBEIT NAVIGATIONALLY IMPAIRED.
>>277976
>IF YOU BELIEVE THAT "ECONOMIC PROSPERITY" IS SOLELY, OR PRIMARILY, DEPENDENT ON THE MOBILITY OF "GOODS", YOU ARE IGNORANT, OR A MORON.
>ECONOMIES WOULD FUNCTION AS WELL IF ALL GOODS HAD TO BE CONSUMED IN PLACE
>>277982
IF YOU BELIEVE THAT I AM IMPLYING THAT, YOUR "READING COMPREHENSION" IS UNDERDEVELOPED.
IF YOU BELIEVE THAT YOU DID NOT WRITE THAT THE MOVEMENT OF GOODS IS IRRELEVANT TO ECONOMIC PROSPERITY, YOUR WRITING ABILITIES ARE UNDERDEVELOPED
HOW IS THE QUALITY OF MAPS OF ANY IMPORTANCE TO THE SUCCESS OF A NATION YOU FUCKING HERETICAL BLOCKHEAD
>>277801
>REGARDING "ECONOMIC PROSPERITY", MAPS ARE NOT REQUISITE, NOR NECESSARY AT ALL.
Yeah it's not like cartography was primarily developed by merchants for merchants or anything.
>>277801
>MAPS ARE NOT REQUISITE, NOR NECESSARY AT ALL.
They help facilitate the movement of goods along long supply chains by giving the involved parties standards of reference; more accurate maps allow for more accurate calculations of travel times, distances, costs, etc. Maps are important navigational tools, too, and navigation is an element of trade and economic development. I'm really not sure if you actually believe this.
>REGARDING "MILITARY VICTORY", MAPS ARE MERELY A MODEL, SO TOPOGRAPHICAL ACCURACY, AND GEOGRAPHICAL ACCURACY, ARE RELEVANT ONLY TO THE LOGISTIC, AND TACTICAL, ASPECTS OF WARFARE, BUT NOT SO MUCH FOR STRATEGY, OR GEOPOLITICS.
>Maps aren't relevant for geopolitics or strategy
>There is no way an object whose purpose is to show the geographical layout of an area can help statesmen or generals act intelligently in geopolitics or war
>Information about geography and the spatial layout of an area is useless to statesmen and generals, and more accurate or pertinent information is not better than less accurate or pertinent information for whatever purposes one may pursue in times of war or peace
Why do you think you're intelligent?
>>277920
>>GOODS SIMPLY WALK TO WHERE THEY ARE NEEDED ALONG PSYCHO-MAGNETIC LEY LINES
More like goods get to where they're wanted by transporters who relied on experience.
>>278899
>relied on experience
Most long-distance traders did two or three such voyages in their lives. Legendary ones did maybe a dozen, along several routes.
It's not about experience, it's about foreknowledge and information.
Of course, successfully managing a caravan/navy or navigating where you want to go requires experience, but that experience doesn't help you figure out WHERE you want to go.
IT IS AS IF EVERYONE, EXCEPTING MYSELF, WERE MENTALLY IMPAIRED, OR HAD ABYSMAL "READING COMPREHENSION".
>>278951
>foreknowledge and information
So experience, whether their own or of others. The point is, an actual map was not necessary for caravan masters and shipping captains to take their goods from point A to point B.
>>278953
oh hey the pedo posts here too
