You are mistaking the sociopolitical strategy of eugenics with the scientific theory of evolution.
Eugenics is the desire to kill your enemies under the defense of improving the culture.
Evolution is the scientific theory that those creatures who die before reproducing cannot pass on their genes, and therefore only those who survive the destructive pressures of their environment do, in fact, pass on their genes, and as a result, the only genes left have been "naturally selected" for survival.
In other words, evolutionary theory is merely the observation of a fact so simple it cannot be discarded - even by anti-evolutionists, because dead things don't reproduce, while genetic change occurs with every birth.
The extent of the influence of the evolutionary process, on the other hand, can be easily argued, because science itself cannot show such the evolution mechanism as adequate to explain many of the developments that are pointed to by anti-evolutionists.
Eugenics merely uses evolutionary concepts piecemeal to serve a collectivist agenda that seeks the authority to exterminate those who would challenge the ruling elite. In this, the link between eugenics and evolution is fraudulent, because eugenics is not scientific - any eugenics selection process is completely biased by the motives of the power group which desires it's use as justification for mass murder.
Well said.
Incorrect assumptions... if you read Darwin you find that the survival of the fittest is not a passive thing, but an aggressive act. Though he did not support the killing of weaker beings, he clearly believed that the act of doing so was part of evolution itself. He also pointed out in great detail the inferior and superior qualities of humans based on race, sex, health, handicap and physical abnormalities.
And along with this, he made it clear the proper way of nature was to eliminate the inferior to promote the strong.
If you wish to qualify his statements as something more or less you have to employ spin, selective memory or revise history.
Oh look! All these famous evolution scientists, and members of the Darwin family, just happen to have been collectivist exterminators... Darwinism-Eugenics. Merely a coincidence, you say.
The religion of evolution holds forth no hope of a perfect millenium in which all evil shall be eliminated and all struggle shall cease... There can be no progress of any kind without struggle... The struggle against evil in general is thus a condition of social progress... Evolution thus offers a rational solution of the great problem of evil. It has taught us that there is all about us a great and world-wide struggle for existence; that inaction and satiety end in degeneration and that advance can be purchased only by struggle, suffering, and death.--E.G. Conklin (AAAS president, American Eugenics Society president), The Direction of Human Evolution, pg. 239--240.
Once the full implications of evolutionary biology are grasped, eugenics will inevitably become part of the religion of the future, or whatever complex of sentiments may in the future take the place of organized religion. It is not merely a sane outlet for human altruism, but is of all outlets for for altruism that which is most comprehensive and of longest range.
--Julian Huxley (co-founder of the Modern Synthesis of evolution), Man in The Modern World second edition, 1950, essay Eugenics and Society.
Nobody has ever proposed a scientific theory of evolution; just the regular unscientific one that Dumwin dreamed up. - Try again.