For your consideration. I might have mentioned this review in some of our discussions months ago.
It's undeniable that Darwin toyed with some eugenic ideas, but he was by no means the first one to do that. The eugenic movement is older than the theory of evolution. However, he was by no means a eugenicist in the sense that he lobbied the government for eugenic policies. He never did this. Yes, he talks about eugenic ideas in some of his works, but they are a tiny portion of his overall writing, and they're pretty vague when it comes to government policy. As a Victorian Englishman he held the mildly racist views fashionable in his society, but never did he at any time advocate genocide. To try to make him into a genocidal eugenicist, the article does a nice quote mine job, ripping passages out of context to distort their meaning. For instance, they take that oft-quoted passage from the Descent of Man about the civilized human races eventually exterminating the more barbarous ones. If you actually read the passage in context, you will note that this is a prediction of what would happen, not a prescription of what he thought ought to happen. His opposition to slavery and other actions indicate that he did not want to see it happen.
Then there's this passage in the article:
Karl Marx asked if he might dedicate Das Kapital to Darwin, which request Darwin declined only because he did not want to offend the religious sensibilities of his deeply Christian wife.
Which is pure BS, and shows the author didn't do any homework, nor does he even know what is contained in Das Kapital. Darwin's letter to Marx is available online, and it clearly indicates that he declined the dedication because he did not know anything about economics and didn't wish his name to be associated with a controversial economic "theory" (if you wish to dignify Marxism with that label) he was unable to evaluate. The notion that Darwin declined the dedication because of his wife's religion is laughable, given that Marx largely ignores religion in this particular book. Yes, Marx was a rabid anti-Christian, but he saved his anti-Christian ravings for other books. Das Kapital barely mentions the topic, as it is a (poor) attempt at pure economic analysis.
When the article started quoting From Darwin to Hitler, I stopped reading. That shoddy book has been discredited on this forum so many times, it is simply not worth any time dealing with it any more.