LOL!!! I see your vocabulary skills are on par with your knowledge of history. Let me guess, you and your friends in the sixth grade make up your own meaning for grown-up words like "fascist" and pretend that everyone who understands what it actually means isn't as cool as your friends in band camp.
I especially like the part about feudalism being a form of fascism. That must kill your classmates during recess.
When you grow up, you may come across a piece written by George Orwell. (He wrote "Nineteen Eighty-Four" and "Animal Farm," among other works. You'll probably be assigned one or both of them in the eight or ninth grade in English class.) But I'll summarize the piece for you: "the word 'fascism' doesn't mean 'something I don't like.'"
I mention England particularly, because modern eugenics was invented by Sir Francis Galton in 1865, and he explicitly based his ideas on those of his cousin, Charles Darwin. In other words, a fascistic individual pondered Darwin's theory, and literally invented eugenics.
LOL... Yeah, Francis Galton was a "fascistic individual." I guess today, using your magic decoder ring, "fascistic individual" means "Victorian gentleman." LOL!! I can't wait to see what you decide it means tomorrow.
A real person: Sir Francis Galton. A particular date: 1865. A direct link with Darwin: his cousin, who specifically credited Darwin with inspiring his own ideas.
LOL... It's amazing that you can cut and paste facts from the Internet without displaying any indication of actually understanding them. Galton was not contemplating natural selection when formulating his ideas about eugenics; he was contemplating artificial selection. That's what eugenics is. That's why forms of eugenics could predate the formulation of the theory of natural selection by centuries.
Darwin's work may have been a catalyst in Galton's case (or, more likely, may have been used by Galton to give his ancient ideas a modern, scientific cast), but they were a catalyst for him contemplating the application of artificial selection to human beings. If Galton "credited" Darwin, he simply didn't understand Darwin's work, anymore than you understand what the word "fascist" means.
(For your original statement to make sense, you'd have to correct its errors. It would then read, "But eugenics is explicitly what you get when a fascist eugenicist ponders natural artificial selection...")
As it is, I'm middle-aged and have a PhD,
LOL... Where did you get this supposed Ph.D? Clown College? LOL... Let me guess, it from McDonald's Hamburger University. I'll bet you're a doctor of Condiment Studies....
A sure sign of a runaway argument is the proliferation of LOL, ROFL and their ilk. Your laughter is a defense mechanism against ideas that might undermine your position. In this case, it protects you from facing the fact that you're guilty of the fallacy of equivocation.
The Italian Fascisti ceased to exist as a party after WWII. Even then, the word was used to refer to more than the actual Fascisti, since it was also applied to German National Socialists who were not literally fascist, but who resembled the Fascisti in certain ways. The third Reich has of course fallen, so even that stretched application of the term is essentially obsolete. Your implied definition of "fascist" is completely useless outside a discussion of mid-twentieth-century history.
In common parlance, and in my post, the word "fascist" was used as a general reference to authoritarians who, unlike the socialists, allow citizens to retain their private property but who, being authoritarians, control the citizens' use of their property. The United States government has enacted a good deal of legislation that is fundamentally socialist, and also a good deal that is fundamentally fascist. See for example Social Security on the one hand, and the Food and Drug Administration on the other.
If you fail to grasp the basic usage of a word, then of course the rest of the discussion will fly over your head. But the rational man remedies his vocabulary problems. The unthinking man laughs, mistaking his incomprehension for the other man's stupidity.
LOL... Yeah, Francis Galton was a "fascistic individual." I guess today, using your magic decoder ring, "fascistic individual" means "Victorian gentleman."
He specifically advocated that public policy should exert control over reproduction for the "improvement" of the species. It's abundantly clear that this fits within the common-usage meaning of "fascism". Of course you'll have lots of leisure to debate whether it's fascistic at all, since you will obviously be forbidden to breed under any rational eugenics program.
Darwin's work may have been a catalyst in Galton's case (or, more likely, may have been used by Galton to give his ancient ideas a modern, scientific cast), but they were a catalyst for him contemplating the application of artificial selection to human beings. If Galton "credited" Darwin, he simply didn't understand Darwin's work, anymore than you understand what the word "fascist" means.
I quote the paragraph in its entirety because excerpting it would be to deface a masterpiece: it's an incredible assembly of incorrect assertions that would be remedied if you'd read anything of Galton's at all.
Galton's core observation was one oft-repeated today: society negates natural selection by providing the means for unfit persons to survive. This observation links natural and artificial selection in a natural and obvious way. Namely, artificial selection is called for precisely because natural selection has ceased to operate "correctly". This extends the analogy of animal husbandry, by calling upon evolutionary theory as evidence that a problem exists, to which artificial selection is then proposed as the solution.
I've already described this as a misapplication of the theory of evolution, so you can leave out your straw-man suggestion that I somehow blame Darwin for Galton. However, it's equally important that you realize the natural (but incorrect) logic whereby natural selection suggests the notion that civilization is harmful to the species. The observation never fails to be made at about that point in a discussion of natural selection. It's the fascist mentality that makes one extra step, and decides government should rectify the situation.
LOL... Where did you get this supposed Ph.D?
I notice that each section of your reply begins with a fresh burst of laughter. You apparently have your mental barriers set at maximum. My PhD is in Mathematics, and was awarded by Syracuse University. That's why I focus so closely on the flaws in your logic; they glow for me like flashing neon signs.