The articles tend to get heavy when we start thinking about cultures and myths, the modern applications and relevancy. But it is very essential to understand what our culture holds for us, what the things are that we do not know about, and how learning about it would benefit us.

In my articles I have tried to differentiate the actual meanings of words and our understandings. The differences are quite drastic. In this post, I would like to write less but get more comments from you as to whether culture is a source of synergy or conflict.

India is divided by languages, financial status, food preferences, etc., but one thing that stays common is the culture.
But is it, really ? Aren’t people united by the language? Aren’t people united with the people of similar financial status?
Ego clashes are less likely in slums than the urban establishments. So are we united or divided by cultural apprehensions. Isn’t culture blurring views of the modernization and the globalization scenarios?

I yearned for answers to the above questions. As intriguing as it may seem, the answers are not answers but pose further questions.

The Islamic State has occupied most of Syria and is quickly growing. What is that factor that brought those forces together? Isn’t it the culture? The religion? Every situation has a two-fold view to it. In case of IS, the culture is what brought the other middle-east countries together to overcome the situation. The IS uses Culture as a synergy to bring conflict upon the world.


African territories like Timbuktu were one of the richest establishments in the world. The culture played an eminent role in making those countries rich. Timbuktu was called the city of Gold. Some great scholars’ great works are still treasured in Timbuktu. But economically speaking, the city is bankrupt. The Gold which was once an identity of the place now is almost extinct. The elderly gold smiths of Timbuktu reckon that they had worked on the purest gold in the world. Unemployment, poverty and epidemics are on a rise. The people who protect the works of ancient scholars are nomads of the desert. The works are worth Millions but the protectors are sacrificing their lives to save the literary works.
So in the Timbuktu scenario, Culture made the empire rich but also tore it apart as it did not fuel globalization. So did the culture give rise or actually kill Timbuktu?


The heritage of Krishnadevaraya of Hampi might have answers for the above problem. Krishnadevaraya is one of the greatest kings in the history of India. Hampi is a treasure of culture in South of India. It was known for its riches. The precious stones and gold ornaments used to be sold on the streets. But it was hit by a curse, when Mohammad Ghazni laid seize to Hampi and looted it of its riches. The historic artifacts and architectural wonders were destroyed in the happenings. So why would such a strong culture fail? It was known for pioneering global trade and international literature. Even with a globalization view point, Hampi had failed.


A famous criminal lawyer once quoted, “I sleep in peace only knowing that I am doing more good than harm”.  So, we similarly hold on to culture as it does more good than harm. Without culture, the whole world wouldn’t be diverse. The diversity is a backbone for the cultural developments. Most cultures grew on other cultures like parasites whereas some cultures were formulated to create a sense of superiority over the other.
Diversity is when you go the USA and eat an American Cheese Burger, the taste of which is unmatched anywhere in the world. Diversity is when you study Indian Mythology to know the importance of marriage in its culture. Diversity is when you go to London and adore the architecture. So we are diversified by food, mythologies and architectures. Or should I use the word divided?

Often things start as diversification and end up dividing cultures. No culture in the world disrespects other culture or preaches to disrespect, it is us that have adulterated the essence of it. So I reckon that Culture sparks a synergy in people but people create conflicts out of it. And globalization a threat to Culture or vis-à-vis. Am I right in my contention? Please comment.