https://www.reddit.com/r/UrbanHell/comments/pyavv4/evergrandes_handiwork/

Some cool people in the comments, and some unironic murican suburbs apologists :stalin-gun-1: :dna:

    • RNAi [he/him]
      ·
      3 years ago

      Mexico city has at least 470 more years than DC, and back then apparently it made a lot of sense to build a city in the middle of a lake cuz easily defensible from attacks, which later still made sense for the spanish, and later it was too big and significant to ditch so...

      Anyways, a bird eating a snake on top of a nopal told the mexicas to build the city there so they had no choice.

      Edit: the bird told them to build the city in Chapultepec (a hill) but other people got angry and ran them off to the lake, so birds are still totally correct.

      • infuziSporg [e/em/eir]
        ·
        3 years ago

        It wasn't a bad choice at all; it was simply adapted successfully to its environment. Tenochtitlan had buildings on the high ground, a bunch of bridges and stilts connecting the stuff above water, and lots of chinampas (floating gardens) everywhere. As a result it was relatively stable and not very flood-prone.

        Mexico City drained the Texcoco swamps, and ever since then, it has struggled with both flooding and damage from seismic activity.

        • RNAi [he/him]
          ·
          3 years ago

          But the pyramid next to el Zocalo was the most important place and it wasn't high ground, every few decades they had to re-coat the sunking pyramid into a new pyramid. It has like seven layers and the inner most is almost at a 90 ° angle cuz it sunked sideways

          • infuziSporg [e/em/eir]
            ·
            3 years ago

            They weren't perfect, and it's definitely arguable that it had sprawled larger than what made sense for islands in a lake. It's all still categorically better than draining the wetland to then build conventionally on.