Globalization is a multidimensional phenomenon that encompasses all spheres of life and ideologies. It is the product of post-cold war period. In reality, much of the confusion and inconclusiveness of debate on globalization stems from the ambiguities of the concept.
Globalization is sometimes presented as a casual theory. Sometimes, it is a collection of concepts, mapping (but not explaining)how the changing global system is to be understood; and sometimes, it is understood as a particular kind of discourse or ideology, often associated with neo-liberalism.
There are also important distinctions between economist readings of globalization that stress increased interstate transactions and flows of capitals, labour, goods and services and social and political readings that stress the emergence of a new form of governance and authority.
Globalization as stated above is seen as a whole, not as part because of the holistic nature of the concept.
Globalization is not a new phenomenenon even though the coinage is a recent one. It is part of the process of the internationalisation of capitals or the continuous expansion of global economy.
Understanding globalization in its relative form, one is constrained to agree with the view that the term globalization has become synonymous with the unfiltered expansion of global market place assuming the status of an ideology which orients the future action and expectations of groups within the corporate world.
It is salient to point out that globalization and neo-colonialism are co-related ideologies which, to a large extent, have the same principle and concepts but the application differs sharply in its mode. Globalisation was designed for mere expansion of trading arena for the developed states.
The developing states were in the stage of neo-colonialism when neo-colonialism was being challenged by the forces of antithesis and synthesis, it then changed the mould of the world into a global village, hence globalization.
Neo-colonialism on the other   hand, was originally designed to replace colonialism. Scholars like James O. Connor, J.O. Olatunji and Henry E. Alapiki agreed that neo-colonialism was designed to prevent the newly independent countries from consolidating and thus keep them economically dependent and securely in the world capitalist system.
Late Professor Claude Ake defines imperialism as the control and exploitation of foreign lands arising from the necessity for counteracting the impediments to the accumulation of capital engendered by the internal contradictions of the domestic capitalist economy.
The effects of imperialism to the peripheral and the core is obviously self explanatory and the relationship is the master and the slave, the former is the slave; while latter is the master. It is the adage that he who blows the piper dictates the tune of the music. The instruments of imperialism are division of labour which is alien to the periphery.
From the above understanding, the similarities of globalization and imperialism are common. From the realist point of view, both phenomenons have no morality in their perspectives, their instruments are different but the end results are the same.
Globalization uses multinational co-operations and the UN organs like World Bank, IMF, UNICEF etc to prosecute its missions, enriching developed nations, while imperialism uses capitals to exploit the peripheral states (the third world countries) through transplanting capital for profit and surplus values.
Chukwudi writes from Port Harcourt.

Ejimofor Chukwudi