Over at Althouse’s place:
Strangely enough, “progressivism” was broadly associated with eugenics and racism and yet the only people who remember that are the people accused of being social darwinists.
There’s a lot more to unpack here than I have time for, but a key point made by another commenter is that no one calls themselves a Social Darwinist — it is an illegitimate epithet reserved for the perceived enemies of same, whereas many have been, and continue to be proud to call themselves Marxists and socialists. And they should be ashamed to do so, given the history of the twentieth century.
Shame is an outdated concept. They eliminated it after the 1950s.
The discussion over there seems a little tangled because few folks seem familiar with the history of the ways in which the progressive movement grew out of the branch of social Darwinism known as “reform” or “telic” Darwinism. Those folks believed that Darwinian theory justified their social meddling because they believed that they could direct evolution; eugenics is but one example of how they thought it could work.
Right up front I see 2 hazards with a social movement based of evolving a “better man”:
– Forms well suited to compete in whatever environment you set up may be contrary to your intended goal.
– So much of what their method requires throwing out ethics, a force in traditional society that is frequently better at producing the kind of people they want.