could someone check this essay?

Hi guys, after many of you had tlod me that my essay contain junk science, I fixed it and considered your notes.
Here it is:

Most of us heard about Charles Darwin who developed theories of evolution based on social Darwinists' theories to result that human can evolve like some animals and plants to become a new one with special and new features. This theory stated that people are always in strugle to get food, healing, jobs and to stay alive. Social Darwinism means that some people are better than others and have more advantages only because of their abnormal genes. In fact, applying this theory will make many problems for societies like racism because it says that the existence will be for the strongest, not like what Spencer had argued"through competition, social evolution would automatically produce prosperity and personal liberty".

Firstly, social Darwinism is only some developed theories, and I think it failed because it didn't depend on direct evidences that can convince the people and the scientists. In addition, it incorporated "law of the gungle" in which the strongest will hold his position forever, and the weaker will hold his weakness. For example, Lions are the strongest kind of animals, and deers are easy victims for them. In real world, the sovereigns will not hold their positions forever because people will take theirs when it is the time for this. Unlike what reform Darwinists argued "human beings need new ideas and institutions as the adopt to changing conditions". We can derive some laws from permanent sources like holy books; also, the laws mustn't be based on natural laws.

Furthermore, social Darwinism didn't contain any solution to solve poverty, slavery and helping disabled people because it gave the right for the strongest races to do what they want, and also they shouldn't care about weak races. For instance, Spencer said "the strong, the intelligent, the wealthy should reproduce themselves". In the same way, laws must only be applied on the poor people and those who have high classes have the ability to override the laws "partly by subjecting those who remain the never - understand the conditions of existence".

In conclusion, I found that this theory can make critical problems everywhere it can be applied. It can cause problems for individuals and hamper their hope to develope as it says "we inherit our parents tempers, our parents' conscientiousness, shyness and ability". Despite the fact that many famous intellectuals adopted social Darwinism like Karl Marks who argued "it is recognises how Darwin in beats and plants his English societies with its 'inventions' and Malthusian 'strugle for existence'", this theory proved its destructive effects many times, like what happened in world war ii when the german nazi leader Adolf Hitler kill several millions of jews just because they were a weak race.

Does this essay include these points?
1. A brief outline of social Darwinism.
2. Discussion of Robert.C.Banister argument.
3. Supporting quotations and explanation.
4. My own argument/perspective on social Darwinism (disagree with/support its arguments?if so why? If not, why?)
5. Concluding remarks.