I’m sorry – my post wasn’t taking issue with anything in yours, but forestalling further movement down that path (shortly after posing, realizing it could be read that way, I edited it to clarify the guidelines are being pointed out “for new arrivals who might not be aware of that” – but you wouldn’t have been notified of edits on replies to your post).
However, politics isn’t just talking candidates and political parties. I’ve moderated discussion forums where this exact issue (globalism / neoliberalism at odds with relatively recent national / conservative movements) has triggered flamewars. (That played out in especially ugly ways in online forums during Brexit.) It always starts with a friendly conversation among logical, mature adults – but individuals are drawn to Campbell’s mythological perspective from across the political spectrum. At some point, specific contemporary examples are raised, a chord is struck, a complex constellated, and a whole dynamic erupts that carries the exchange far beyond the often laudable intentions of those who began the discussion.
Didn’t have a problem with the drawbacks to the status quo you raised, and the need for something new. It’s the nuts-and-bolts discussion of how we get from here to there, in terms of implementing policies, sharing power, and/or assigning blame, that can take us away from myth into the political swamp. It’s easier to let folks know before they start down that path that we just aren’t going there, than to put the brakes on once the train has jumped the track.
But if we keep the focus on the mythological narrative, rather than venture too close to current real world examples, we can explore the interplay through the imagery, without getting bogged down in details given different weight by different individuals.