We created a meta-network with products and services all around the world. We can share data, knowledge and information from different regions of the world. Due to the technological improvements, a product can be made in China, while it is designed in US.
We are not only exchanging goods but also people who are dedicated to build such systems and artifacts. According to a recent study, the number of expatriates is around 50.5 million in 2013 and will reach 56.8 by 2017 [1].
We need more people for not only technological improvements and also cultural diffusions. According to recent news, EU Erasmus Exchange Program was responsible for 1 million babies [2]. However, this program only covers the 28 EU members and some other close habitat countries. If we are also going to count the international students, the number of 1 million is going to be a small part of big picture.
These babies are going to have their names. Name, something is given to us from our family and we are carrying it till the last moment of our lives. We are creating stories around names, careers, patents, and inventions. Name giving is something special and spiritual. Whispering name to a newborn, using holy water in a naming ceremony, it changes from culture to culture.
According to our small experiment, these international couples tend to give;
- Two names from their cultures
- A common name that can easily be pronounced in both cultures
We do not know what the future conjectures of political views, tensions will be… However, having two different names can open some doors in this global system because of the familiarity rule of human psychology. I believe that the impact of these two named kids for future is going to be different from today’s world.
What is the point?
I am more interested in the same concept for another reason. Can we inject the same concept to one-nation couples? Do we really need two persons from two different nationalities for having a baby with two different names?
Why? I remember the TED talk of Matt Ridley “When ideas have sex”. Here are some of my assumptions as output of using such strategy:
- Having two names can reduce nationalistic driven racism movements
- Having two names can create a grey area between these nations which are going to make easier to solve upcoming conflicts
- Having a higher empathy level on external facts
Imagine a world that has enough named “Abel Abbas (Jewish-Persian)” both in Israel and Iran. Imagine a world that has enough named “ Mete Jiwan (Turkish-Kurdish)” in my motherland. Will it be easier to escalate problem or solutions?
I talked with people on this idea. I get used to get negative answers. Some of them connected having two different names to assimilation while some of them said it is being sneaky for future. On the other hand, I found some people who are ready to ruin the basic assumptions but they are afraid of not reaching a critical mass.
Four persons changed their opinion when I said that if there is 1M people are promising to do the same thing.
Let’s back to previous example Abel Abbas. If we cannot reach a critical mass of Abel Abbas, smaller group can be identified as backstabber for both group and they are going to be in problematic situation in some extreme situations. There were also people who were literally afraid of doing such things for their beloved ones because of this valid reason.
Conclusion?
Sorry, this issue cannot be concluded without trying it. Can I give another cultured name to my kids? Well, still thinking about it… Do you see more positive effects on this issue or more negative ones? Do you think that you are going to change your answer according to choice of other individuals? Let me know about your personal opinions.
Some people may read this article because of my UX background:
Here is a summary of what I tried to highlight:
- The most effective design is unseen one.
- Don’t change too much for a bigger impact.
- First touch point is always important.
- Without critical mass, some people are not going to follow you.
Thank you very much for your time.