Throughout history political and religious powers remained averse to diversity and  tended to create  homogeneity at the cost of separate and distinct cultural, social, and linguistic identities. In an attempt to weld together different communities, the ideas of oneness and brotherhood were propagated to lure people to come in one circle in order to get economic benefits, spiritual comfort and political security. All great religions through their missionary activities made fervent efforts to convert majority of people belonging to different groups and nations and to bring them in their fold. Most of them succeeded only with the help of political power and became universal religions. In an attempt to universalise one true religion, the diversity of different religions was wiped out and newly converted people were forced to renounce their gods and deities  which originated from their own milieu and to recognise the religious tenets which were foreign and alien to them. That was the price which was paid  to become a member of the universal religion; a kind of religious globalisation which was intolerable for other faiths.

The most coercive attempt to politically homogenise the world was made by the great empires when they started the process of conquests and after defeating the weaker nations integrated them under their shadow. To gain the obedience of  vanquished  people, it was required to eliminate their separate identity and amalgamate them into one nation .The ruling dynasty became the symbol of unity and embodiment of peoples’ inspirations. Thus we find that in the past, globalisation was universalisation of great religions and politicisation of great empires. We also find that whenever great empires established their political domination, it accompanied imperial cultural onslaught which very soon influenced the elite classes who adopted it to become a part of the ruling clique. This divided the society into two distinct classes; common people kept the local culture while the upper classes assimilated in the dominant culture; for example, in medieval  Europe Latin was the language of the privileged classes, which was later on replaced by French language along with the French culture. It was imitated by  the European elite with pride. Commenting on it Elias Norbert in his book “The civilizing  Process” writes: “It is courtly aristocracy embracing Western Europe with its centre in Paris, its dependencies in all the other courts, and offshoots in all other circles which claimed to belong to “Society” , notably the upper stratum of the bourgeoisie  and to some extent even broader layers of the middle class.” In India , with the advent of the Turkish and the Mughal dynasties, Persian language became the  language of the elite classes and the court culture was imitated throughout the subcontinent by the aristocracy.

 However, in both of these cases, varieties of cultures  submerged into one patronized  imperial culture. The attempts to universalise the world created intolerance towards those who resisted these processes. They were regarded as great enemies and an obstacle to  further progress and development. However, in Europe,  as a result of cultural globalisation the movement of nationalism and the institution of nation state emerged  to challenge it. The spirit of nationalism  resurrected the dormant  national culture and integrated all classes in one nation to assert their identity. However, the  emergence of nation states in Europe created competition among them to supersede  each other politically and culturally. This gave birth to colonisation. The process of colonisation was not only economic and political but also cultural in which every European colonial power made attempts to persuade and coerce its colonial subjects to adopt its cultural pattern.

 Thus, colonialism effectively followed a policy of globalisation by disseminating its culture, institutions, language, politics, education, town planning, sports, farming, mining, manufacturing and pastime, which consequently changed the whole composition of society throughout the colonial world. For example, slaves were imported from Africa to supply the labour wherever the colonial powers  needed  them.  They were uprooted from their homeland and forcibly brought to the West Indies to work on the plantations. Later on, another method was adopted to acquire cheap labour that was the system of indentured labour. Thousands of poor people were shipped as cheap labour from India and China to South Africa and West Indies  to work under unpleasant conditions and for low wages. History is a witness to the millions of people who suffered as a result of the decomposition process  of Asian and African societies, which was undertaken purely for the colonial interest.

 Like always the local elite classes of the colonies immediately adopted the foreign culture and integrated themselves with the colonial power in order to retain their privileged status. Moreover, it was not in the interest to the colonial power to educate the masses but to patronize a class which could collaborate with them in maintaining law and order. McCauley in his famous minutes (1835 ) writes: “We must at present do our best to form a class of persons Indian in blood and colour, but English in tastes, in opinions, in morals and in intellect.” Once the colonial culture became advantageous in acquiring social status, everybody tried to adopt it.

 The process of colonial globalisation was checked by the nationalist movements which emerged in the middle of the twentieth century and achieved  political independence from the colonial powers. But the colonial culture was retained by the elite classes of the newly independent countries in order to maintain their superiority and domination over the masses. Nationalism, initially, was used to fight against the colonial power, but  now it is used to protect the privileges of the ruling classes. The condition of the people more or less remains the same.  The elite classes, under the influence of western culture, work  as collaborators in furtherance of their past colonial masters.

 Recent globalisation is changing the role and character of  nation state which is losing its strength and surrendering its powers to the forces of globalisation. Economically, a new economic order is taking shape in which it appears that only capitalism is capable to transform  and change the world. Technologically, scientific and technological inventions are helping rapid flow of information and ideas  throughout the globe.

 It is apparent that as a result of globalisation all cultures are homogenising into one global culture. This creates disorder and chaos because disappearance of indigenous culture is leaving societies in a vacuum.  And homogenisation  of some particular culture in the shape of global character is  alien to most of the societies. Appadurai in his article “Disjuncture and difference in the Global Cultural Economy” writes about the five dimensions of global culture: ethnoscapes which indicates flow of immigrants, refugees, exiles, and guest workers; technoscapes which reflects flow of machinery produced by multi-nationals and national corporations; financescapes which shows rapid flow in currency markets and stock exchanges; mediascapes which promotes  flow of images  and information ; ideoscapes which communicates the images associated with state or counter state.

 Therefore, it appears that the process of globalisation is creating disorder and instilling fear among those societies which are not powerful economically or politically to face its challenges. They are afraid that their culture and identity is going to be wiped out. The question is whether globalisation would be confined only to the elite classes as happened in the past or leave the masses helpless and forlorn. Global identity cannot take place  of national identity because national identity has a past, a common history and values which unite different groups into one; while global identity has no past and no history and no  common  memories. Then how can it replace national identity?

 On the other hand whether we like it or not the world is shrinking and coming together. This interconnection and interdependence is creating common problems which can be solved globally: such as nuclear proliferation, degradation of environment, exploitation of natural resources, and inequality between the north and south. There is also a debate that capitalism, one of the powerful vehicles of globalisation, should be given a human phase. Recently at Davos, where all great capitalists met, they discussed that keeping in view the lesson from the collapse of South East Asian economy, there is a need to revise the whole agenda. Will Hutton in an article “Davos gropes towards a more humane capitalism” writes: “ Asia went wrong because too many of its  governments were non-democratic and corrupt, running a system of crony capitalism. Davos’s globalizers want democratic government, the rule of law, transparent  rules, fair play for all and, in Asia, extraordinarily strong social security safety nets. Good intentions. Oppressed and exploited people are waiting for deliverance.