I don't think using frequentist methods makes anyone a eugenicist by transitivity, but I do think it's important to understand the motivations behind the development of notoriously confusing, misapplied methods.

If you consider the context, I think the author's position that the confusing aspects of it are very likely because of the desire to (falsely) profess that we have removed all aspects of judgemental decisions from a particular procedure which was driven by the desire to convince people that it wasn't their opinion, but fact, that they were genetically superior beings.