Zarathustra (Nietzsche) observed that dogma's replaced personal intelligence, and are used as absolute truth. He also noticed  that especially in western towns real creativity and common sense was disappearing. That lead to a world full of bureaucracy and vanity, in fact a frustrating place to be. He nevertheless decides to start the superhuman fight for real human common sense values as found natural ethics

Like later Ludwig Wittgenstein and Thomas Kuhn in their theories, Nietzsche chose without any doubt for relative knowledge like is subject of discussion in the Popper-Kuhn controverse. As its greatest threat Friedrich Nietzsche saw dogma's in any shape. That's why he fanatically fights religion (mind that means NOT that he disrespected believing) and state-bureaucracy, because those were in his time the most noticeable shapes of absolute truth. Ludwig Wittgenstein later gave up the fight to start a respectful life in rural Norway. Thomas Kuhn realized the job for him was too big, and didn't even start fighting.

Nietzsche was a brilliant common sense thinker, but because he was a not above average author his writings were often misunderstood. On close reading one notices that in his rhetoric language he makes beautiful cartoon-like descriptions of presumptuous enemies of knowledge. But way too lengthy and far too many, and because of that few really read his tedious biblical satire about dogma. And even then most of them skiff the text. Something else is that both Christian religion and the then emerging states were quite powerful. In practice Nietzsche was born at least an age too early, and his objects of anger were more stealthy and had more might than even he may have thought.

That made Superman Zarathustra more like a Don Quixote, in an unequal fight. Nietzsche was too much acknowledged as a genius to ignore completely, but his common sense teachings met heavy resistance in 'rational' toplayers of 'philosophy' and 'politics'. Friedrich Nietzsche was ready to be a cultural guide for 'rational herds', but all he got was an obscure place in a 'rationalized' history. His spiritual leadership was considered as mind terrorism and only kept alive by some wondering philosophers, and egoistic right wing politicians. Robin Hood is still remembered as defender of the poor (although that was not his main fight), but Nietzsche in general isn't remembered at all. If at present you look on Internet for 'Also sprach Zarathustra' then you'll find more information about the musical symphony of Richard Strauss bearing this name than about philosophy.

Nietzsche cherished personal creativity. He realized though that being taught has its limits. At some point students should go their own way. Teachers should realize that in the end intelligence is personal, otherwise they become without doubt objects of worship (gods). That' what Nietzsche saw happening in religion.
According to Nietzsche religions have many good sides, but too much want others to suffer like their teachers. But surely Nietzsche recognizes the collective aspect of religion as an essential basic force. It only shouldn't result in the absolute situation of students that are forced to become clones of their examples. Ceremonies were main result of Christian religion, while Buddhism gave practical advise how to live. In Christianity Masters became more like only examples, but blueprints for life. This results in a relative  standstill, progress is still made but only based on the same holy principles (linear).

Being generous with your knowledge is a must, but be sure to leave your students when the time is ripe. Don't hinder them in their personal creativity.
This is what Nietzsche meant when writing in the foreword of Ecce Homo: The man of knowledge must be able not only to love his enemies (henk tuten:collectivism) but also to hate his friends (henk tuten: individualism). It was his way of saying that individualism and collectivism should be in balance

Often Nietzsche in Christian Science was described as a devil, and at present he still raises strong emotions. But Giambattista Vico as first serious 'attacker' of rationalism in 1744 was really treated as a devil and actively ignored completely to die anonimously.

Nietzsche's unwritten theory of knowledge was brilliantly formalized by the elder Wittgenstein in his masterwork Philosophical Investigations' (but lost in the bray of sometimes remarkable thoughts). The 'Closed Circle' part of those thoughts was soon extended by Thomas Kuhn to lead to his theory of paradigm shifts. So maybe Nietzsche's influence was not completely lost, because with or without his help a thread of his thoughts stayed alive. Indeed Nietzsche was more like a warrior in his fight against dogmatic thinking. Maybe his spiritual heirs were more subtle, and therefore had more influence.

Wittgenstein was acknowledged as a language genius, and 'The structure of scientific revolutions' by Thomas Kuhn was recognized as a milestone. But in practice not much changed. The world is full of dogma's, existence for most people is 'gray'. And undeniably there's a lot of vanity.

Still evolution has it ways to force a paradigm shift. In the past often Ice Ages served as a breakthrough. That could mean starting all over again, but evolution is patient and a one-way road remains a dead alley.

Already in 1908 (!) the in Baltimore born critical journalist Henry Louis Mencken wrote that the following EASILY could be extracted fom the thinking of Nietzsche. He probably had a lot more 'common sense' than present US leaders. [in my own words]: 1. All beings in reality want to live (will to power) 2. Morality is ethics in shape of Laws. 3. Such laws are man-made and mutable 4. The human will to power shaped in Laws separated humans more and more from being just 'animals'. 5. Any morality after change of condition slows down progress. 6. Gods and Religions are there to protect moral codes against change. 7. All the ideas of such gods and religions are enemies of life (The Joker: I.e. they kill the creative mutations of selection virus 'evolution') 8. Human rulers should reject all gods and religions and trust the moods produced by intuition. Mencken also wrote that rational thinking seemed to obscure the DIRECT message in Nietzsche's common sense words. Nietzsche had left the Western ideas of individual freedom, individual rights, rational equality, nationalism and patriotism. They turned out to be wishful thinking. That was HARD to digest for his contemporaries. Even Fjodor Dostojevski worried: If God does not exist, doesn't that mean everything is allowed? Dostojevski must have meant: Without Gods, no Ethics. But Gods only hinder the respecting of man-made rules (The One: Dostoyevsky was raised in a home of 'spirit believers', and all his life struggled with the idea 'God').