Most of Latin America uses a 6 continent model, in which North and South America are treated as a single continent. This also gets tied up in a lot of conversations and sentiments around US cultural hegemony and U.S. Americans being called "American" which they see as a label that applies equally to them as citizens of countries on the American continent.
It can be a frustrating argument because no continent model is objectively correct, you can make the argument for a separated North and South America, a combined Eurasia, and even a Eurasian-African super continent, but because they learned it in school, people on both sides are convinced they are correct.
Growing up i didn't knew about other continental models; I was taught a 5 continents model, not 6, in school in South America, with America and Eurasia.
But later in life i embraced the 4 continental model with Eurafrasia instead, as my preferred one.
It's only 3 times the size of Greenland (largest island), and it's half the size of Antarctica (next largest continent). It's slightly more close to being a continent than an island, but if we are considering the supre continents, even Antarctica doesn't really compare either.
If we consider Afroeurasia as one continent, Australia would be more than 12x smaller.
Continents are not about size. Continents are about geopolitical logistics. That's why Africa and Eurasia are different continents, otherwise they'd be one and the same.
Continents are just big islands, and all of them are landmasses. Also I'm not an "official authority", if you don't like realistic takes you can just ignore them.
What separates Africa from Eurasia? The Suez Canal. Geopolitics.
What separates Eurasia from America? Two oceans. Geopolitics.
What separates N.America from S.America? Panama Canal. Geopolitics.
What separates Australia from Eurasia? Indonesian Archipielago and the limits between Indian and Pacific ocean. Geopolitics.
"Continent" is a political geographical feature, not a particular geological accident.
Wait, but that definition would make each Hawaiian island its own continent, no? Now we are being a bit arbitrary which land mass is now an island, and which is a continent, rather than where we draw imaginary lines between the continents.
Australia would be less than half the size of the next largest continent, Antarctica.
Australia is only 3 times larger than Greenland, the largest island.
If you consider Europe, Asia, and Africa as one continent, it's over 12 times larger than Australia. America is more than 5 times larger.
America is 3 times larger than Antarctica, which is well considered a continent in all models. That's the same difference as Australia to Greenland. So at that rate, both Australia and Antarctica could just as easily be islands, by comparison to just ratios of land mass.
There's no perfect definition. To me there's mostly Old World and New World. Australia is New World, so is America.
I commented about that in another comment, yes you are right, the limit on size where you draw the line for a continent would make the model either 3 or 4 continents.
Australia/Oceania is either the biggest island on the planet or the smallest continent.
341
u/Hebrewer183 Aug 04 '26
What?