What's in a (repaired) ceremonial gate name?

Everyone seems to think that by simply changing a name, everything changes. But calling a Burma 'Myanmar' or a pig 'bear' doesn't change the entity. The latest case in point involves the renaming of a ceremonial gate in Chittaranjan, the industrial town near Asansol in West Bengal, home to post- Independence India's first and now largest railway locomotive factory. Bulganin Gate was a commemorative structure erected in 1955 to felicitate visiting Soviet leaders Nikita Khrushchev and Nikolai Bulganin. But the gate's maintenance suffered over the decades. In 2000, to let an imported locomotive on top of a trailer through, the top half of Bulganin Gate was removed. Subsequently, it was damaged, with only four pillars visible to remind anyone of Bulganin or the gate.

Now, under Chittaranjan Locomotive Works (CLW) general manager Satish Kashyap, Bulganin Gate has been restored. That should be good news. But renamists (people opposed to renamings) are up in arms as Kashyap plans to rename Bulganin Gate 'Amrit Dwar' in keeping with GoI aesthetics. While that bit could be resolved by a referendum - something that Indians seem to be allergic to - isn't the fact that the gate has been re-erected with amended design (it will now be adorned with lights too) a cause for cheer? Instead of getting bogged down by the pointless politics of renaming?