The problem that I was identifying was the unification of humanity through language. There are two main ways to attack the problem, everyone can be multilingual or everyone can know a common language.
Every first world country teaches English to their students, so who do we focus on? Every quickly developing nation has a culture which encourages English (by her grandparents suggestion, my neice in Beijing is only allowed to speak English when I visit). And by having English language education in developing countries you get past the cultural disparity much quicker. The point here is the difference between missionaries and ex-pats, who helps a country more? If India is an example, the answer is clearly expats.
Language as identity does not explain the failure of Esperanto. Heres the difference between Esperanto and English. In comparison to working through Unua Libro, the benefits of learning English actually exist. If I know Hungarian and Esperanto, I can not find a job as a taxi driver in London no matter how long I spend driving around town. If I know Hindi and English, with a few trips to the library and a couple years of practice I can work at any tech company in the world.