First of all, please define “Darwinism”. I know what evolution is, but I’m not quite sure what you mean by “Darwinism”. If you mean that the two are the same, then why would you state that Darwinism, eugenics and evolutionary theory were intertwined? Surely, you must intend a difference in meaning between evolution and Darwinism or why not just say that evolution and eugenics were intertwined?
Next, even given the truth of your assertion that evolution and eugenics were intertwined, so what? The Christian church and medieval society were intertwined. Medieval societies regularly condoned the torture of people for a variety of reasons. Does that imply that Chritianity condones torturing people? Obviously not. If Christian beliefs were used as a justification for torture, that would be a perversion of Christian belief. Similarly, using evolution to justify eugenics is a perversion of what evolution actually states, which is that genetic diversity is beneficial to a population of organisms.
As you point out, Darwin, and every other scientist studying evolution, are fallible humans. The fact that scientists misrepresented the conclusions of evolution reflects badly upon those individuals, not on the theory itself. The theory stands or falls on observational evidence, not on the use to which it’s been put by humans. And I would agree with you that better education on the subject is necessary. Very few people actually understand evolution, which may be why many still think it has something to do with the origin of the universe, the earth or life.
By Darwinism, I mean evolutionary theory as first understood by Darwin himself - an evolutionary theory that was rooted in the holistic Romanticism of German naturalist Alexander von Humboldt, the uniformitarianism of Lyell in order to pump up evolutionary theory with millions of years to make it more plausible, the so-called dismal naturalistic materialism that considers only materialistic causes for evolutionary development, coupled with a racist Victorian view of life that placed the white man on top of the evolutionary totem pole together with Hegel’s evolutionary philosophy of history that came to the same conclusion, albeit a German one. In other words, I do not believe that there is any such thing as a neutral evolution that can ride above the fallibility of people and philosophy and politics that you are so eager to define for me. This is a pure fantasy that only exists in the modern evolutionary mind. Evolutionary theory is just as philosophical and political as it has always been, just with a different push in a different direction.