The economic policy (may it be on the level of WTO or on national levels) is unified worldwide. Regarding the objective necessities of capitalism it is in vain to call the capital for social or corresponding economic actions, may it aim at the whole national economy or at single enterprises. This is also true for the "national state" which is on the side of capitalism and so accepted the necessities of competition. The sharper international competition does not leave any space for social measures and the world wide homogenitiy of the system and the high unemployment rate make them useless. Saying this I want to focus on the fact that improved labour conditions or wages can be realized only by strength - and that this realization needs(nearly) as much strength as overcoming capitalism. Saying this, in my opinion the aspirations of criticising globalization move their focus from the national or international bargaining level (NGOs and Unions) to the militancy in the work place and to social movements.
Struggles at the level of enterprises need information and alternatives to challenge the so called necessities, so do the social movements. Both must cooperate and internationalize themselves. Those points of view will be described using examples of "LabourNet Germany"activities.
A internationalist union movement that must see itself as a part of social movements must move away from the traditional corporate and centralized unions. Therefore it needs its own forms of organization(networking,decentralized) and non-censored flows of information. That is the only way in which the everyday union activism will be able to mobilize the highest possible number of working people (including unemployed, working poor andmigrants) to self-conscient struggles and international networks.