[Symmetry]

I think economists have done pretty well overall. It got termed the "dismal science" for opposing slavery in the 19th century ("They'll be more productive if they get paid") and generally being against imperialism ("Can't we just trade with them?"), being against the corn laws, etc.

And if I go look at the Wikipedia page Eugenics in America[1] and read through the bios of the first few supporters I can find I get Francis Galton (Polymath uninvolved in economics), John Harvey Kellogg (Doctor), Charles Davenport (Biologist), Henry H. Goddard (Psychologist), Harry H. Laughlin (Sociologist), Madison Grant (Conservationist), Karl Pearson (Biostatistician), Alexander Graham Bell (Inventor), David Starr Jordan (Biologist), Luther Burbank (Botanist), and Margaret Sanger (Feminist).

I don't want to say that economists are blameless here. Henry Rogers Seager famously used eugenics as a reason for a minimun wage writing “The operation of the minimum wage requirement would merely extend the definition of defectives to embrace all individuals, who even after having received special training, remain incapable of adequate self-support.”

But overall it seems that when economists disagreed with the predominant intellectual milieu they've mostly been right and they've mostly only been badly wrong when they've followed along with it.

[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics_in_the_United_States