The Power of Names
Names are far more than just words and syllables. They carry historical significance, cultural weight, and the power to shape identity. In a world where governments, corporations, and influencers often seek to reshape our lexicon, the struggle to retain an original or culturally resonant name becomes a subtle yet important form of resistance.
Through a postcolonial lens, names are powerful tools of domination and resistance. Colonial powers deliberately renamed cities, peoples, and regions to assert control over groups of people and erase invaluable histories. In actuality, this practice was not about replacing one label with another but an attempt to rewrite history and oppress certain groups as dominating powers saw fit. Today, the colonial legacy of renaming persists. When local populations continue to use their original names despite official rebranding, it is an act of cultural reclamation.
Names connect communities to their past, serving as vessels for collective experiences. When a powerful entity imposes a new name, it attempts to sever that connection and alter the narrative that the name once carried. However, as demonstrated through the modern rebranding of “X” (formerly Twitter) and the political renaming efforts for the Gulf of Mexico, such efforts often prove futile in the face of deep-seated cultural identity.
Elon Musk's high-profile decision to rename Twitter as “X” was met with widespread skepticism and resistance from users. Twitter's name has accumulated significant cultural capital over the years; its name is synonymous with public discourse, breaking news, and real-time social commentary. Twitter’s iconic bird logo elicits a welcoming environment, and its blue and white colors signify instantaneous communication with close friends or strangers. The name and logo of “X”, however, carry an ambiguous and impersonal undertone, with its dark black and white tones contrasting to the lively and social connotations of Twitter’s name and branding. By renaming it “X,” Musk sought to repurpose the platform's cultural legacy under a new guise, which some interpret as a bid to assert a new order under his vision.
However, most users continue to refer to the platform as “Twitter,” rebelling against the official rebranding and demonstrating the power of an original name. These users' resistance symbolizes a subtle protest, a refusal to allow an external force to completely overwrite the Twitter community's shared history and cultural identity. This phenomenon raises an important question: Is the continued use of “Twitter” a conscious cultural protest against Elon Musk’s top-down rebranding, or is it simply a reflection of the public’s difficulty in abandoning a term that has become deeply ingrained in everyday language? The answer, in my opinion, is both. On one level, it is a pragmatic decision; people tend to stick with what they know. On the other hand, it is a symbolic act of defiance, a way for users to signal that the narrative of Twitter belongs to the community, not corporate executives. Another example of the power of names in recent news is the maneuver to rename the Gulf of Mexico as the “Gulf of America,” illustrating the political motivations of renaming while mirroring the white colonial practice of renaming during European expansion. Just as European powers renamed indigenous lands to erase local identities and assert territorial control, President Trump's executive order seeks to reframe the Gulf's historical and geographical identity in a way that consolidates national power. In response, social media quickly exploded with viral memes and commentary subverting the official designation, with users renaming the gulf in various ways that poke fun at the absurdity of this governmental decision. These online reactions underscore a fundamental truth: Names rich in historical and cultural significance are not easily overwritten. Just as the public’s continued reference to “Twitter” resists a corporate rebranding, so does the enduring usage of “Gulf of Mexico” serve as a counter-narrative to an imposed change. The online memes and jokes highlight a collective sentiment that although the government “can do whatever they wish,” they cannot alter the lived reality and historical identity associated with a name. Rather than erasing its past, the renaming of the gulf has sparked a creative and widespread reaffirmation of its established identity. As such, the public’s response can be interpreted as a refusal to let a top-down political decision define a region with a rich historical and geographical legacy.
In an era of rapid technological, political, and cultural change, the battle over names remains a powerful metaphor for the struggle over identity. As history has repeatedly shown, attempts to overwrite these names often meet with determined resistance, highlighting how the power of identity lies in those who uphold it.
