Labor internationalism was closely associated with the notion of globalization. As Robinson notes, globalization was a new era in the continuous expansion of world capitalism marked by the increase in the globally integrated financial system and production.2 Furthermore, that process was characterized by the appearance of the transnational capitalist class and nascent transnational state mechanisms. Meanwhile, structural innovations in the world economy related to globalization strengthened the new division among the former Third World elites between nationally- and transnationally-oriented unions.3 While those two sets of elites had coincided in some issues, they competed in many others. Thus, the development methods employed by them at the end of the 20th and the beginning of the 2st centuries were disparate. Nationally-oriented elites aimed at constructing national courses of growth, whereas transnationally-oriented ones intended to incorporate local circuits into transnational areas.4 Such conflicting approaches to development entangled specific sets of policies. Firstly, there were policies securing local workers from global competition. Secondly, there were the ones accommodating local agents into transnational areas.
One of the countries in which the transition from the Cold War to capitalism was a prominent process was Germany. It was the country that had been
a symbol of the Cold War due to its capital being divided into two parts by the so-called wall of shame. When the war ended, German workers, as well as many laborers in other countries, faced a series of challenges. Particularly, there were considerable modifications in work conditions due to alterations in the political and economic systems. After the fall of the Berlin Wall, the superiority of American capitalism was proclaimed in Germany.5 The country, which was divided into the capitalist and state-socialist parts, fell under the strong influence of the Cold War. Laborers were the ones who felt the divisions effect especially acutely.
European socialism evolved within nation-states and was created by individuals belonging to subordinated classes that also considered themselves as nations. Hence, working classes in this part of the world were constructed on the ground of already established national identities, which had symbolized the feudalistic political geography.6 The creation of working classes in such conditions was not similar to that of American and Canadian, which were settled through the combination of imported national identities and the racial expulsion of colored and indigenous workers. Furthermore, whereas the concept of internal colonization processes could be applied relative to North America, it was impossible to implement them in European Germany.