The capitalist globalists have done what capitalists do, search for the lowest costs and the lowest quality that continues to sell for the highest price. That's economic globalism.
But the social globalism, of having human rights upheld around the world, a common attitude towards personal liberties, freedom of thought, speech, & work, entitlement to shelter, safe food & water, education, health care etc.
I don't understand why people are against that? You don't think everyone deserves to live with the same level of freedom as you do? They don't deserve to choose their government and leadership like you do?
What is it about that side of globalism that people hate so much?
You can always wonder what there is left for people to do for a living if there's always someone willing to do it for less and have fewer kids, working longer hours. (with economics they simply say that there should always be something to do in a service based economy, but obviously service based jobs can be hit as well) So if you take it to the conclusion it looks fairly bleak. It raises a lot of existential questions of what group you belong to and how you can meaningfully contribute.
The person youre responding to is a victim of the US culture wars. That is clear as day with the mention of a feminist blog Jezebel, that's entirely irrelevant to the story of Quartz, a business focused website. I'm not going to speculate why a word like 'globalism' results in the clutching of pearls but i think there are some historical precedents around certain similar phrases like 'cosmopolitan', that provide a clue.