I would say Nietzsche was ahead of the game on politics. He castigated Bizmarck for his backwards-looking appeals to racism & jingoistic nationalism. He ended his friendship with Wagner over the latters antisemitism.
I would describe Nietzsche not as a nihilist, but as responding to the crisis he foresaw of the loss of a shared model of the justificacio of a life, by faith expressed in works. Nietzsche recognised this, correctly, as not simply as an existential personal challenge, but a challenge to social cohesion. I see this as chiming with foundational sociologist Durkheim, and his framing of the social-decohesion from personal anomie, and that the holding and sharing of sacred values is what binds communities - not simply narrowly concieved Abrahamic sacred, but sacred like habeus corpus is in the UK (& the many parliaments who adopted the Magna Carta into their founding), or free speech in the USA, or scientific method & peer review to the scientific community.
Nietzsche anticipated the attempt to form new metanarratives, new politico-religions, of Marxism and Nazism. And the threat of anomie of having no real meaning to narratives at all, that we might identify with postmodernism, for instance Kuhn's denial that science ever really progresses. He spent relatively little time on politics though, and far more on art, morality, and culture. For me his philosophy, his diagnosis for humanity escaping this need to have one shared meranarrative, is summed up when he said
"Man's maturity: to have regained the seriousness that he had as a child at play."
In his 'three metamorphoses' on the spiritual path, he has the camel with a solitary separating nature, and picks a load to bear. The lion stage comes after having truly found your domain, mastering it, and so being able to assert your will against others, from this place of knowing. There's no doubt Nietzsche was happy for people to be forced to allow space for art, for creativity, to create a culture with space for those with such introspective power to assert their own picture of what justifies a life. But the child stage is greater still, beyond being reactive, the child stage:
"is innocence and forgetting, a new beginning, a sport, a self-propelling wheel, a Sacred Yes"
I would say then
a) yes, boredom. Don't be boring, it cannot stand the challenge of imagining eternal recurrence. Whoever opposes greatness in others acts like 'the last man', to whom everything superhuman 'appears as madness and illness'.
b) no. Paternalism only, dominating for the greater good, to champion art, and creativity, play, and the path toward angel-hood. But far better to lead by example, as a champion, a hero, a visionary.