Thanks for the sober analysis. I've only read bits and pieces of Nietzsche, and I know what a walking contradiction his philosophy can be (by design? I'm not sure, but if I want someone who contradicts himself in his writing, I'll turn to the sweeping poetry of Walt Whitman, thank you very much).
I particularly liked this bit of your entry:
"Instead of sulking and resenting them for this, we need to PUSH BACK. We need to exert our own force, the force of a sane humanity (or proletarian or whatever way you want to phrase it). The point isn’t to offer some kind of resentful moral indignation, but an actual political vision. An exertion of will and power."
That resonates well with Marx's argument against "critical-utopian socialism and communism" toward the end of the Communist Manifesto. He accuses this sort of sentimental communism to be politically untenable and of actually appealing "to the feelings and purses of the bourgeois." Essentially, relying on moral indignation and not a political strategy is a recipe for dependence on the bourgeois. Marx isn't calling to change hearts and minds; he wants to topple the system and burn it to the ground.
It's also exactly the milquetoast strategy of the worst political party in history: the Democratic Party
Sad thing is that I do harbor myself in Illinois, the most liberal state in the Seven Seas, and I can confirm this. They are, after all, the death of all progressive movements.