Free and unfree will, and direction in evolution

Nietzsche thought denying free will denies morality, but then he made a morality out of the will to power, but called it immorality. It took courage to deny free will, however, Nietzsche missed seeing a direction or goal to the will, he saw the will as a completely relative will to power, which later, with the postmodernists, meant that relativity in values and morals prevailed, with disastrous results for high culture in the West. But a direction or goal to the will to power does not mean that we have a completely free will, we have free will limited to a few choices within the determined path of life and evolution, like a boulder rolling down a mountain. We evolve toward more efficient forms, more complex forms, with starts and stops and backward goings along the way, heading toward Godhood at the zenith of evolution.

What is the direction, the goal which Nietzsche denied? It is seen as the Will-To-Godhood, or Tirips, rather than as a goalless will to power. Defining Godhood needs to be revitalized outwardly, from its exclusive inwardness: we evolve to Godhood by way of material and supermaterial evolution, which was at first seen only inwardly as the symbolic experience of the God or Father Within. Even Nietzsche's radicalism is denied because religion is revitalized, culture is brought back to biology, back to the real morality, which develops instinctively by way of survival and reproductive concerns, with conscious rather than unconscious evolution added. And this suggests the Ordered Evolution of conservatism.

With biology and evolution back in the picture, altruism and morality are not the evil Nietzsche thought they were. It is true that other than a little borrowing from other cultures, it is innovative individuals who are mainly the creators of culture---supermen and superwomen in that sense---and the general population tends to genetically and culturally lag behind. But even supermen do not survive long without the group, and without group values and altruism. Problems develop regarding how to bring the population up to the quality of the creators and innovators of culture, in our continued evolution toward Godhood. This is where evolutionary  values come from, always activated by the largely un-free direction of the evolution of life, while being shaped by outside evolution and selection.

In our overpopulated world, one superman dictator, or one imperial state, or one imperial people, or culture, will not survive for long, the world always gangs up on such arrogant selfishness. This does not mean that we are all the same and that we can all get along in one homogenized multicultural configuration---whether the present globalist rulers benefit from it or not. They too will fall. Human nature remains kin-centered, gender defined, heterosexual marriage-making, hierarchical, ethnocentric, even xenophobic, among other things, with group-selection as the primary unit of selection. We require an ethnopluralism of states, protected by some sort of federalism (not unlike the original U.S. Constitution), which is how as many groups as possible may best survive and creatively evolve, with relative independence, while we are evolving together in the world, with conscious cooperative competition, toward Godhood. Otherwise we may not survive, yet alone evolve.