The core of the difficult challenge to migration policy making is replete with a fear of loss of national, cultural and personal identity. So much so that some authors have compared unabsorbed diasporas to the level of unsafe carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (see here). So I have started reading about identity and human diversity, starting with Amartya Sen’s “Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny” to now Richard Lewontin’s “Human Diversity”. I was struck by Sen’s observation that everyone has multiple identities and should have the choice, and responsibility, to prioritize those identities. I am even more struck by Lewontin’s finding that racial classification (Caucasian, African, Mongoloid, South Asian Aborigines, Amerinds, Oceanians, and, Australian Aborigines) has very little correlation with genetic variations between humans, that majority of genetic variation is found within (rather than between) populations.
Because major players in the on-line world like Google+ and Facebook are insisting that people should use their real names (that is, reveal their true identities) there is a debate going on in the emerging global public sphere on the role of pseudonyms. In what follows, I attempt to sum up the arguments for and against – as I understand them.
Social networks matter.
“It’s simply about being human: creating, sharing, consuming ideas.”
In marketing courses, we learned that youth in different countries around the world often share more similarities with one another in their tastes, preferences, and decision making processes than they often do with older generations within their own respective countries.