Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
My ex had the most common last name in the world - sharing with 107 million people.
You can tell these men have left some legacy in the world - making up a huge amount of the people.
Which means genetically they have been very successful.
Why are other last names so much less common, while some bloodlines are so successful?
Is it that Asian men are more fit?
I’d love you to prove me wrong, please.
Even if it was related to fertility and genetics. This isn’t an admirable thing for the Asians. A lot of places within them first struggled as third world countries. Mid 2000s and I saw articles about the congested living conditions in east Asia and Japan. Some countries where you see videos on old YouTube videos where someone was endangered, not everyone helped but many stared. They didn’t always care about those in abusive relationships. Children in abusive situations. Nor random people who needed help.
Regardless of country overpopulation has surfaced at times in conversations and articles.
A good word to summarize all of this is the repulsive word used in pxrn sites as a new fetish word- “breeding.”
I don’t see why having many descendants/ “over breeding” people, would be admirable thing, when many people have hardly contributed to the world, and just birthing kids, who grow into other adults who don’t wish to play roles of good samaritans and such, and some who litter and willingly feed the issues. Why would any of those things be admirable?
So yes, let’s look into it on another aspect. Economics. Marketing contribution. Success rates. How many of those lineages are of wealth or rising to wealth- how many have companies, in today’s world, with their name? Are those companies wealthy? Are those companies ones with good causes for aiding the needy or helping global issues, or those on the state/ country level?
Some with big names would come from early ancestors who were royal bloodlines and enforced immoral things like slavery, the use of servants, and some were natural warlords. I don’t see those things being admirable.
Population numbers of descendants and ancestors included has nothing to do with overall economic success and marketing contribution, as well as community and global aid and resolution.
The numbers just would be important back then when traditions valued fertility and life span. So many survived. That’s good? How many are struggling and how many live mundane lives.
They survived basic illness that once killed off others, but not many have turned around and made an impact on the world.
To me personally, numbers aren’t as impressive as world changers and those with LEGACY. Or
Genius.
Those are the ones who carry out good causes or create new solutions to problems faced long ago. If anything “long living lineages” can be accused because of they lived so well and for a long time period, how come they didn’t attempt to fix things that have been going on since their first ancestor?
Surely they all studied history.
Aside from this, yes, their name in number and the coincidence it provides is entertaining, and/or exciting. Other than that it’s no admirable, and I don’t see any long lasting name itself as being impressive. On the western side a long lasting surname is not linked to lineage and it can be that way for some other countries as many first names were given by parents to mean what the child was to become or what they symbolized. Some were named after their parents to signify power and legacy. The surnames didn’t always mean this. For many, it simply described their basic, yet contributing profession to their communities and villages.
Potato farmer. All kinds of farmers. Black smiths. Animal breeders. Butchers. Bakers. Etc.
No one from any country with an appropriate worded thing as: common surname, is impressive.
Those in particular basically had the same line of work not the same lineage lol
in the western world, the last name doesn't really say anything about your legacy. You can choose whose name in marriage you get or if you create a new one, what name will your kids have... the connection between the genetic line and the name is distorted...
Asia is large. If you're talking China that's very different than Kazakhstan or Pakistan/India. China actually has a lower total fertility rate than the U. S. Check out this map:
In homogeneous countries like China where it can be problematic to marry outsiders, as you well know, it's easy to see a name like Wang or Li be somewhere on every block. There's no dilution to the observation set. Traditionally women take the husband's last name in most cultures. The white women move to China, get married, become Lis or Kims, as do their children, the Chinese lady that moves to Houston and marries becomes a Johnson or whatever (and is likely to have more children than the white woman in China, statistically). Those children will in turn half take on new names. In places in China where bloodlines are cherished, there will be much higher frequencies of marriage within the extended family to preserve the Wang line... third and fourth cousins all with the Wang name marrying over and over again produces a town where half the people are Wang. Some of them move out to other areas, but the cycle continues because preservation of the dynasty is important, in cultures like the U. S. where dynasty is passed to family regardless of name, there's no intrinsic incentive for a Johnson daughter to FIND another Johnson to marry.
It isn't necessarily what you think. Scottish clans all had the same surname as I understand. It wasn't so much indicating clan membership. I think in the early days in China it was much the same. A group of people would have the same family name but it was indicating belonging to the same tribal or clan.
So the McDonalds clan all had the surname of MDonalds. Not that there were surnames in early days as they were heraldic. Common people tended to get surnames that indicated what they di. Like Smith for being a smith or fletcher for fletching arrows. so what became european surnames was more varied.
You could argue the Wang tribe was particularly fit in retort. Maybe I could suggest that being an early agrarian society that that enabled more people in response. I am not going to argue strongly because this is based on stuff I read a long time ago which might not have been right anyway.
At the time of the American Revolution the population of Britain was only 6 million.. Not a whole lot. China is thought to be 150 mill so there had to be more food. I suspect that is more the answer though.
Opinion
20Opinion
One thing at least here in Japan is that shared surnames are not necessarily indicative of a shared lineage.
A lot of family surnames in Japan were derived based on descriptions of their location at the time they were given a surname, like "Tanaka" (田中) is a very common surname that was given often to rice farmers and means, "Center of rice fields."
My surname is also relatively common and refers to fields of green tea on a mountain (my ancestors were green tea farmers). Yet I've met so many people with my surname in common and they come from an entirely different lineage.
The exceptions are people who come from a noble lineage. Those names often have a shared ancestry, but most of us who had peasants for ancestors were often given common surnames that overlapped without having any shared ancestry.
So that might at least be a part of the reason.
Take the surname O'Neil. It's the name of great Irish Chieftains and there are many O'Neils globally including Shaq O'Neil.
In thr us the most common surnames are 1. Smith (English) 2,442,977
2. Johnson (English, Scottish) 1,932,812
3. Williams (English, Welsh) 1,625,252
4 Brown (English, Scottish, Irish) 1,437,026
5. Jones (English, Welsh) 1,425,470
6. Garcia (Spanish) 1,166,120
7. Miller (English, Scottish, German, French, Italian)
1,161,437
8. Davis (English, Welsh) 1,116,357
Some very famous names.
There are 97000 with Percy as their last name. The percys were Norman invaders who came over to England in 1066 and are still there as Lords going on nearly 1000 years. They are even mentioned in Shakespeare
You're talking about the past - a past that ended 30 years ago for China, and 50 years ago for Japan. Japan is well into a demographic collapse, and China is just starting to feel the effects of its own, which will continue to worsen for at least 50 years. The Asians who are doing well are the Indians, and I suspect the Vietnamese will be doing quite well too, as their economic outlook continues to increase.
You're talking about something that has a long trailing effect - it takes a long time - decades - for the impact of current birthrates to be felt by society. You're talking about what was happening 2 or 3 generations ago, at least, for most east-Asians.
It's supported and encouraged in the family and culture.
I got none of that in my family. My whole family will fizzle out.
Just peoples people reproduce doesn't mean they are so great, just means successful. Far too many people reproduce without the means of caring for the offspring. Chinese though, do very well.
The west is screwed up...
Asian cultures are tribal in nature. Like my tribe is Gujjar or Chohan in Subcontinent. So, we have a big population belonging to same tribe. It doesn't mean we are ethnically different from others in my country. It just means we have different traits and qualities.
Like Kumhars are potters, Mughals are blacksmiths, Gujjars were fighters and each has goods and bads. And some people use Syed to claim descendants to Arabs and so on which is totally fake 😂 as DNA tests show they are from our part of the world.
Genetically the people are not fit per say. Just that they are more integrated into the culture and lineage.
Western people have less of this because they intermingled a lot and lost the same touch with the family profession after the industrial revolution. Nobility is more the focus then tribe.
You’re misinformed on multiple counts. The Japanese and Koreans have the lowest replacement rates in the world. Even the Chinese have dropped below replacement rate.
On surnames, the West has more surnames than the Chinese.
Asians often times have lots of kids to please their parents. Asians worship their ancestors, so the more kids they have, the more people will worship them. Asian kids have traditionally contributed to their families. so if you had a farm, more kids, means you could grow, and maintain more crops. westerners dont have lots of kids because their kids don't help out, and end up costing them. so it's the opposite effect of a traditional Asian household. westerners also are not as concerned about lineage. if you look at many Canadians dont even know where their ancestors came from. an Asian can often time trace his ancestry 10 generations back. these days, Asians dont really have that many kids anymore. even when you look at japan, they have very few kids. even when you look at americans, they had 8 kids in 1800.
China has recorded more than 20,000 surnames, estimated at up 23,000 surnames. Eventually, they formed into around 6,000 surnames. Over their long history - migration, political turmoil, warfare, fiefdoms, imperial decree, simplification of Chinese characters, and a naturally occurring process called Galton-Watson where they are lost or die out over time with each new generation as women take on their husbands’ surnames. It has nothing to do with fitness.
Last names have historically the meaning of occupations and not blood relations. That’s why in German the most common names are Müller, Maier and Schmidt.
Our ways of determining last names are different, lol.
The most common last names are usually bound to a region. You have X as last name because you were born at a certain place.
On the other hand, others just make shit up; Like calling yourself Baker, Brewer, Carver because you needed something.
Same last name doesn’t mean related. Some cultures/regions just don’t have many
I think it's the community aspect of it as well, as people stay as a close knit group, putting more emphasis on family, making and protecting it.
Some Asian countries people use their Family or tribe name, As Kennedy is family used by their members, like, John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy and Bob Cannady, from Texas, USA
Just because they have the same last name doesn't mean they are all related
Breeding partner selection, closeness of Family, Culture, All contributing factors.
Perhaps because Asians are (correctly) not self-hating.
Because we r traditional types
u we watch a whole lot more TV...
Genghis Khan. Enough said
Because they're all fucked up.
You can also add your opinion below!
