The commercialization of higher education has radically marginalized history and other social sciences. These disciplines have been reduced to the status of poor cousins of professional courses. Social scientists are being seen as the less glamorous and more crisis-ridden ‘country cousins’ of natural scientists. Time has come for policy makers and managers of institutions of higher learning to realize that just as the market needs engineer’s managers and scientists; social equilibrium requires philosophers, artists, social scientists and historians. More recently, the whole issue of ‘history from the bottom up’ received undue attention because of the controversy surrounding the question of cultural censorship which led to the practice of book pulping. ‘History from bottom-up’ is also termed as people’s history, grassroots history, history from below, history of the common people and sometimes even history of everyday life. It is an attempt to elevate the activities and thoughts of those people and regions that were neglected by the earlier historians. This type of approach to historical truth meant getting at the memory of things said and done in human life and thought. Bottom-up history instils a respect for and attention to people’s lives, culture and traditions. It shows how these things, under the right circumstances, provide seeds for mass resistance. It shows how new political cultures based on ideas and values can emerge and become hegemonic. History plays a powerful constitutive in determining an individual’s sense of personal identify. The greatest repression, perhaps, is to deny and deprive people of their history. People’s history perhaps will invariably solves this problem.