You simultaneously mischaracterize what I wrote and assume that you speak for multiple classes of people, universally, world wide. You're wrong about what I wrote and you're wrong in your assumption of the universality of your opinion.
I didn't say anything about off shoring or massive immigration. There's majority support for lots of qualified categories of immigration, and it's not based on rent-seeking higher classes. Sometimes it's mutuality (e.g. EU free movement), sometimes it's competitive (e.g. football players), sometimes it's self-interested (e.g. doctors), sometimes it's ethnocentric, etc.
Please don't pattern-fit what you read to your pet trigger phrases.
What else can people do, when they lose their jobs to offshoring and trade agreements, and find that everyone in their neighbourhood is now talking in foreign and competing with them for housing? All they can do is demand that foreign interference and immigration be brought to a halt.
I'm not advocating nationalism; that way lies war. But hyperglobalisation has failed, and needs to be reversed.
I would point to China as an example of nationalism paying dividends.
Off shoring and massive immigration are never popular with the working and lower classes, these are popular with the higher classes who desire cheap labor for their rent seeking operations. This behavior is neither liberal nor democratic and is rarely the product of a broad base democratic effort; its not as though the immigration politics of the modern west emerged after popular outcry- they are entirely top down efforts. In this regard we can say that they might be enlightened from a certain perspective but are they really democratic?