Colonization for the most part was motivated by economics as European powers sought to expand their markets and acquire raw materials overseas. After World War II, colonial systems were dismantled in a process referred to as' decolonization', when the European powers determined that the benefits of maintaining colonies were not worth the costs. But have we really decolonized or have we substituted one style of colonization control for another? Today, the term'neocolonialism'refers to the practice of using capitalism, globalization, and cultural forces to control a country in lieu of direct military or political control whereby neocolonialism is motivated solely by economics. Corporations and nations seek to achieve favorable overseas economic policies by pinning loans to particular actions on the part of a developing country. This is accomplished through the implementation of the dependency principle. The lending practices of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) are two examples of international lending agencies using their economic clout to ensure certain actions and policy decisions are agreed to by financially vulnerable third world countries. However, these actions and policies are instigated to ultimately benefit wealthy western interests to the detriment of the borrowing parties as both organizations act as agents of neocolonialism. From a humanistic standpoint, both agencies will lend money to developing nations. However, to receive the funds, these sovereign nations must accept a list of terms and conditions that generally advance the ideals and economic norms of these organizations. There is really no choice in accepting this' strings-attached'economic aid from the developing nation's point of view-the people eat or they starve. This represents a clear example of the dependency principle and ultimately, neocolonialism in action. One of the driving forces behind today's neocolonialism is the interconnection between nations, however, one of the negative side effects is a loss of cultural identity. In these new alliances, all your threats (economic and cultural) and opportunities increasing flow from'whom'you are connected to further deepening the dependency. Berger (2011, interview) stated it best when he said," the negative side to globalization is that it wipes out entire economic systems and in doing so wipes out the accompanying culture". In this paper, we examine the evidence that points to the inescapable conclusion of what neocolonialism really is-economic colonialism in disguise. Today, the list of beneficiaries under economic colonialism has expanded to include not just wealthy developed countries and a relatively small number of individuals and companies but a plethora of wealthy influential individuals and artificial legal entities such as multinational corporations. The evidence will show that there is little difference between early European colonialism, which used direct military or political control to take over a nation to advance their economic expansion and today's neocolonialism that uses funding agencies, multinational corporations, globalization, capitalism and cultural forces to accomplish the same outcome. Complicit in the propagation of neocolonialism are business schools around the world who repackage and market this devastating philosophy and making it a required course for every entering class and calling it" Globalization: Introduction to a Global Market Economy".