The Narcissistic Cosmopolitans By James Reed

     Pardon the French, but I hate the bloody globalists who are intent to destroy our world. I am not a “hate’ kind of guy, and I know that it is illegal, punishable by death, to hate anything except racists, but I really can’t help it. If some bully kicked sand in your lunch every day at school, and when you turned the other cheek, he smacked you in the neck, wouldn’t it be hard for man cursed with original sin, not to be a wee bit angry? Just a tiny bit?
Here is something interesting, if not tasty:
  http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/03/20/economist-open-society-advocates-are-narcissistic-cosmopolitans/ 
  https://www.economist.com/blogs/bagehot/2018/03/globalisation 
  https://www.firstthings.com/article/2018/04/the-ignoble-lie 

“The globalists’ premier weekly magazine has thrown a spear into their smug claim that they represent the open-minded, open-economy, open-society future. The Economist‘s supposedly anonymous “Bagehot” columnist described progressives as “narcissistic cosmopolitans” as he wrote: ONE of the most popular interpretations of modern politics is that it is increasingly defined by the difference between open and closed rather than left and right. Openness means support for both economic openness (immigration and free trade) and cultural openness (gays and other minorities). Closedness means hostility to these things.…

The people who make the claim aren’t just engaging in dispassionate analysis. They are players who are engaged in a political battle: “closed” is used as a pejorative description (“closed-minded”) and “open” as a term of praise. There are also far too many difficult facts that do not fit into this pattern.…

there is a much better way to understand modern politics: that is through the prism of meritocracy, in particular the divide between those who pass exams and those who do not. Passing exams gives you an opportunity to enter a world that is protected from the downside of globalisation. You can get a job with a superstar company that has constructed moats and drawbridges to protect itself from global competition. You can get a position with a middle-class guild that has constructed a wall of licenses. You can get a berth in the upper-end of the state bureaucracy or a tenured job in a university.

Exam passers combine a common ability to manage the downside of globalisation with a common outlook—narcissistic cosmopolitanism—that they pick up at university and that binds them to other members of their tribe. Failing exams casts you down into an unpredictable world where you are much more exposed to global trends such as the shift of manufacturing jobs to cheaper parts of the world. Exam failers are also bound together by a common outlook on the world: anger at the self-satisfied elites who claim to be cosmopolitan as long as their job is protected, and a growing willingness to bring the whole system crashing down.”

     I particularly liked the connection drawn between the universities and cosmopolitanism, for these institutions are grounded on anti-national, anti-local sentiment, which they tip into young brains, continuing the disease down the generations. Thus, I want to end this, by ending the universities. Most of us have been saying things like this for a long time, so it is surprising that the ultimate pro-system paper would throw a few conceptual crumbs our way. Present in the quote are all the sentiments expressed in this week’s tale of woe by the various writers, who suffer in isolation, but are joined in misery. We really must do something about what is happening, don’t you think?