Me vs. Dog Breeding: Part 2: Adolf Would be Proud

Part II of my vitriol towards the practice of pure-breeding dogs.

I knew a girl whose family bred dogs, and we would regularly get into arguments over the subject of purebreds. On my side of the argument was evolutionary and veterinary research and science, and on her side of the argument was the firm belief that Charles II of Spain wasn’t that messed up. To be fair, her side also had the backing of science firmly rooted in Victorian-era misunderstandings of Darwinism – misunderstandings which led people to believe that superior offspring could only be achieved by mating the best individuals in a group, and which created a field of philosophy known as eugenics. The eugenics movement was of course famously featured in Charlie Chaplin’s 1942 classic Die Endlösung der Judenfrage - though you may know it better by its American title The Final Solution of the Jewish Question. This isn’t to suggest that people that believe a superior dog can only be achieved through breed purity are as bad as the Nazi’s, but they do seem to be sharing a text book.

Some people just really love the concept of selecting lines to maximize desired traits in an animal. They love it so much that they completely ignore that the majority of breeds were only formally established in the late 19^th century after dog fighting was outlawed. They love it so much that they continue to hold on to a Hitler-approved social philosophy that has long since been disproven. They love it so much that they ignore that recessive alleles don’t always combine into something awesome like Voltron. Inbreeding, even when they’re “only cousins,” tends to yield animals that are more likely to be sterile, susceptible to disease, and born with physical defects. Though, those are just a few small prices to pay for having a dog that is instantly recognizable for its superiorly circular family tree.