It's an important issue you're raising, but I think you're quick to dismiss religions, especially Islam and Hinduism. Are you assessing Islam based on Muslim migrants coming to the West? I think that wouldn't be a fair assessment. They seem to be doing a good job resisting modernism in the Middle East.

How is Hinduism not universalist? It has, historically, not been as unified as Abrahimic religions, but it's in the process of being unified under Hindu Nationalism, and movements like ISCKCON have adherents worldwide, in the millions. There's also Sikhi.

To me, the issue is that religions are filled with superstitions. But if you take those out, it becomes dry and will lose the beneficial effects such as maintaining contentment and integrity in individuals, installing social cohesion, scalability. I wonder if some kind of middle ground can be found between enlightenment ideals and traditional monotheism. Belief in God isn't a superstition unto itself. The question is how much the existence of God, without any superstitious overlays, really implies. I plan to flesh out this question and develop an alternative that's in accordance with reason. Although lately I've been wondering if "religion" is even the right word for something like that.