[Dimensio]

But my entire point was that socialists tend more towards the Darwinian point of view, while capitalists do not.

Let's go back to the original comments.

You said

I've never met an evolutionist argument yet that didn't start with the assumption that the basic arguments for it are true and beyond argument.

I replied, quoting ONLY that and asking

Could you be more specific, or are you just going to assert this without evidence?

I didn't ask for evidence regarding your claim about evolution and socialism. You made an assertion regarding arguments for evolution and I requested that you support that assertion. Pointing out Hitler, Stalin, Pal Pot and the others does not address that question at all.

[Frumious Bandersnatch]

Sorry about that. I'm replying to too many threads. Anyway, I've never seen an argument made by evolutionists wherein they did not assume that their basic premise was beyond reproach. Rather than address the actual issues (and use the good ones) by those critical of parts of the evolutionary theory, they have a bad habit of attacking instead.

Why not just admit that there are problems with, for example, the evolution of information, or that they cannot successfully test the validity evolution without using ID tools?