As I say you talk about relatively recent politics. Even the imperialism is quite young (ca. 6000 yrs.). Yet, the interactions of geographically separated groups of people even before rise of civilizations are an established fact (e.g. Natufians in Levant were ancestors of local and Central-European population, etc.). Not to mention that first cities (such as e.g. Catalhoyuk) were largely cosmopolitan (and egalitarian, mind you, but that's beside the point).

So, I meant to say that what you describe is merely a fight of two organizations, I dare to say churches, of institutionalized knowledge for dominance. One is the old school religion (the modern religious sects due to their "methodology" belong here too) and the other one is academia. Both are dogmatic and mistaken. The former is ignorant in light of new discoveries the latter is arrogant in cutting the branch it sits on. While one wallows in childish BS, the other one cannot see the forest for the trees as it is, like a boastful teenager, infatuated with its own accomplishments. Yet, again, this is merely a current status quo. The starting point, which was a majority worldview back in the day, was quite different (alas, in line with majority view, you consider animism to be a religion, whereas I see it as a way of life). All in all, even today, most folks are neither religious bigots nor transhumanist idiots.

Thus it has nothing to do with spiritual practices, the sparse remnants of the "original" animistic societies (which are sadly more often than not marked by modernity too -- after all, nothing exists in total vacuum), wannabe "mystics, neo-hippies, incels," or what have you. It's all about common sense.