Most people don't care about what Evola, Nietzsche or Marx believed, about the metaphysical idealism-dualism-physicalism debate and the 'hard problem of consciousness', or most of anything else Keith mentions.

"Most people" don't care about politics either and from among those who do, "most people" make zero impact. Politics is not a question of numbers, especially not of numbers at the expense of everything else. All three of the thinkers you mentioned make this very clear for their readers, in different ways.

To win on the macro-level there needs to be a simplification of the message. Avoid speculation. Avoid unsourced claims whenever possible. Engage more with science and less with philosophy.

All of these things have their place in political practice, but that's just half the picture. To simplify a message, first you need to have one. Similarly, philosophy is invaluable if it is done well. Something important that a lot of people miss these days is that science itself is based on and is a form of philosophy. Without understanding the implications of that, you will always be at a disadvantage when trying to use science, because you would be failing to understand the tool that you are trying to use. When people discuss the nature of consciousness, knowledge, epistemology etc. it isn't just something they do for the sake of it, it is done because these things are important and determine the entire content and direction behind the ideas humans rely on to make sense of the world.