Globalism also quite literally lifted hundreds of millions of non-western (mostly, not exclusively chinese) workers out of destitution and into the middle class.

Let's keep some perspective on this, please. We can certainly do better with equality of opportunity here in the US, but let's check that privilege a little before demanding to unwind all the gains made elsewhere. To the rest of the world, the 1960's were a nightmare, not a golden age.

If a globalization measure pushes a large number of Americans out of jobs temporarily, it could be the basis of such a "populist uprise", but couldn't it be better for the country as a whole if it opens up new areas for economic growth, even on a purely self-interested level?

And couldn't part of the gain for America be in building up a prosperous nation with trading ties? Not to mention the lower risk of conflict with another nation with whom America has such ties?

True. You've pretty much identified the nature of special interest groups and why they have so much power.

We must ride the train of pathological altruism to the very end!

Ironically, this religion of globalism is a crude form of Christianity, with none of the pretty prose. The original sin of success must be paid for by eternal self-flagellation.

Even more interestingly, this new religion has only taken root in the west, which has mostly abandoned traditional religious dogma. Perhaps pathological altruism is inherent in those of western genetic origin? The non-western world appears to have none of these hangups regarding their past successes. I don't see Japanese and Chinese leaders flooding their nation with immigrant labor to atone for their recent economic gains while demonizing their own people for past sins.

Fascinating indeed.

It was the libertarians and liberal economic establishment who claimed it was cut and dried that unrestricted free trade was better for all Americans. Anyone who objected (Buchanan, Perot, now Trump) was obviously stupid, and probably racist.

Economist have studid the problem for a long time and the wastly overwhelming majority still support it. They have actually fought about the problem quite a bit.

You would do well to actually understand the argument instead of mischaracterising it.