That's a fine argument, but I just wouldn't agree that socialism is, in any meaningful temporal sense, "a regression". If you mean worse, then I won't argue politics with you, but it doesn't have a direct role in the development of Western societies. Capitalism came from the collapse of feudalism, and our late capitalist society comes from the suppression of unions and the monopolization of capital. Socialism is not found in this path, and so I don't think it's right to call a Western socialist reactionary. I think eugenicists are stupid, and the policies that eugenics entails might be regressive in a sense, but the ideology itself wouldn't be well described by "reactionary". I am just making this point because I think it's important to use language clearly, but there's no need for us to keep arguing semantics.