[flar]

I am reminded of an old concept from 1950s sociology: Cosmopolitan vs. Local

Locals:
-parochial
-preoccupied with local problems to the virtual exclusion of the national or international scene


Cosmopolitans:
-identify and relate to issues, events, and social organizations outside of his local community.



There is even an article from 1963(!) that could be about Hamilton now(!):


Thomas R. Dye (1963) "THE LOCAL-COSMOPOLITAN DIMENSION AND THE
STUDY OF URBAN POLITICS" Social Forces, Vol. 31 No. 3: 239-246.

Abstract:
The local-cosmopolitan dimension refers to the scale of social environment in which the individual sees himself. Locals view themselves primarily as members of the local community, while cosmopolitans are more aware of their relationships to larger social organizations. Locals and cosmopolitans among political leaders and residents of sixteen suburban communities were identified by their consistency of response on a five item local-cosmopolitan scale. Localistic attitudes were found to be inversely related to status. Political leaders at the municipal level appeared to be more localistic in outlook than their constituents. Local-cosmopolitan attitudes were also found to be related to varying opinions in three current metropolitan problem areas, transportation, municipal jointure, and zoning.



A prescient excerpt from that article:

"Analysis revealed that individuals who were unable to perceive their relationship to any larger social systems constituted an important segment of the opposition to government supported mass transit operations. The opposition to mass transit stemiming from the occupational characteristics of lower status residents was in this case reinforced by the greater parochialism of these individuals" (p. 246).