Sorry, but it feels like you started this thread with an idea like "FP is better and only myths and misconceptions keep it from becoming more mainstream" whereas I think that FP itself is a big misconception -- it ignores the reality of what computers are used for and what you need to do when you "program".
For me programming was mostly solved in the 60ies with Algol and the likes. It was a "general purpose" language which means "imperative" programming and most inventions that came afterwards were nice, very welcome additions (objects, mutability control, sum types, pattern matching, exceptions, macros...) but not essential. Throw away the "imperative programming" and focus on OOP or on FP or on "declarative programming" or on "actors" and the result gets much worse as you removed the essence. That doesn't mean that OOP or FP or declarative programming are bad, it means they are not as important.
