The author presents nationalism as an ideology that is ever-present; but that is amplified by hyperglobalisation. I think he's right about that. In fact I think nationalism is a reasonable response to damaging interference from foreign powers and international institutions.

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.

Bashing immigrants and bashing immigration are different ; Usually accusations of the former serve to allow the later.

I would point to China as an example of nationalism paying dividends.