Truth can be divisive. That's why states prefer unifying lies. The right-wing reaction cannot win by exposing the truth, for states have powerful ways of maintaining unity (hate speech laws!).
For example, COVID vaccines were more about maintaining unity during a potential global economic breakdown than about medical necessity.
Since the state and its elites derive power from unity, they must peddle unifying lies ("together against the vaccine sceptics" or "unite against the threat of independent white men").
I really dislike Yuval Harari and I don't support his transhumanism but he was right about fiction trumping truth.
Where the task is bridges, medicine, weapons, harvests, or accounts, false belief is punished by the object. Where the task is loyalty, sacrifice, legitimacy, or large-scale cooperation, a shared falsehood can outperform a divisive truth. States therefore protect technical truth in limited institutions and narrative falsehood in public doctrine, often at the same time.
There is however an opportunity: any who manage to produce a new big noble lie may seize power over the existing unity, for example when the old lies are falling to maintain unity or when the unity starts breaking apart like the Tower of Babel.
It's therefore very possible for a right-wing reaction to seize power — if they manage to invent the right lie ("we need hierarchy for humanity's survival") in a way that mostly everyone will be forced to accept. It could happen during a sudden global economic collapse ("let competent white men take over for the good of all").
The true people in power are indeed the people who write the best unifying fictions. Power comes from unity and that's the truth.