Not since the 2003 American-led invasion of Iraq have transatlantic relations been as strained as they are today. While some may look to blame Donald Trump’s “America first” policy as the primary cause of renewed tensions, we should not forget that there were problems under his predecessor, Barack Obama, too. The hacking of German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s cell phone, for example, may not have garnered sustained press coverage in the US, but it did in Germany. There is a perception in Germany that American firms such as Google and Facebook simply aim to suck up as much data on their users as possible and to sell the data to advertisers, trampling on Germans’ beloved right to (data) privacy. The seemingly dead negotiations surrounding TTIP were also a cause for major protest in Germany. But this is not to say that the complaints are one-sided. Many in the US’ defense industry have long complained about Europe’s – especially Germany’s – seemingly lacking desire to invest in defense, a sentiment President Trump has been all too keen to tap into.
The average German knows far more about American culture and politics than the average American knows about Germany, and that makes sense, given the history of the 20th century. This knowledge, however, extends beyond a two-minute story on the nightly news or seeing a movie made in Hollywood; many young Germans have traveled to the US or even studied abroad there as either high school students or during their tertiary education. This has led Germans to value their relationship with the US more than vice-versa. While many young Americans hope to vacation in Europe at some point in their lives, there is a wide gap between spending a week at tourist sites and spending time – even if it’s just a summer – living in a country and getting to know its people.
In order to improve transatlantic relations, priorities need to be set on a number of key issues, the most important of which are trade and security. Germany and the US have a very large trade relationship, but given Germany’s membership in the European Union, there is a limit to what can be done at the bilateral level, especially given the current state of affairs in both Germany, given the large backlash against TTIP, and the US, with Donald Trump recently saying that Germans were “bad” because Germany has a large trade surplus with the US. That said, there are things that can be done. For example, Germany’s famed Mittelstand has benefitted for years from the country’s apprenticeship program. Why there have been multiple attempts to bring this over to the US, it has never been done so on a centralized basis. Setting up knowledge-exchange programs whereby representatives of large US-based manufacturers learn how the German apprenticeship program works could go a long way to improving on-the-job training in the US while also leading to new markets for the German Mittelstand.
The other obvious area for improved transatlantic relations is defense. While NATO has been in the news a lot in the past few months, it is not for the right reasons, as discord between the US and various NATO allies achieves nothing positive. It is hard for many average Americans to see the benefit of an alliance that, in their view, only consists of the US carrying the major share of the burden, both in terms of monetary costs and fighting capabilities. Given Europe’s and Germany’s past, however, it is a difficult for European politicians to sell increased defense spending to their people even in the best of times, which, economically speaking, many European countries are not in. That said, Germany’s economy is booming and German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble’s “Schwarze Null” would not be threatened by a modest increase in spending to reach the agreed to goal of 2% of national GDP in defense spending.
Both key areas identified here are primarily political in nature: while trade undoubtedly enriches both countries as a whole, the rise of populism in the West and in Germany and the US in particular shows that there are still winners and losers from trade at the national level. If not dealt with in a constructive manner, those who have lost due to national trade are more likely to vote for extreme candidates looking to up-end the status quo, causing chaos and instability. On the defense side, we see the long shadow of the 20th century influencing German and European willingness to invest in national defense, leaving Americans feeling like they are being stuck with an expensive bill. In order to strengthen German-American ties, it is key that decision-makers, be they politicians, business leaders, or civil society advocates, know one another and interact with each other in order to better understand their partners across the Atlantic.
So where do we go from here? Advocates for the American-German relationship need to build bridges, to meet with one another and to exchange knowledge and best-practices. Vacationing in one another’s country is not enough, and issues such as trade, security, and cultural understanding can go a long way to making a sustained partnership. Political exchanges – both at the highest level and at the lower, career-bureaucratic level – are one way to nurture communication. Bringing business leaders together is another way to promote knowledge exchange and multilateral trade. Lastly, encouraging young people to learn the language (although this is mostly a need for Americans to learn German rather than the other way around) of key partners would help foster broader cultural understanding that is the backbone of sustained productive partnership, as evidenced by the relationship between the US and the UK.
Dear Andrew, love your article!! From my own experience, having been an exchange student in the US, I agree with your remark that the “average German knows far more about American culture and politics than the average American knows about Germany” and that this is something that needs fixing! I could never quite understand how my American friends never really had an increased interest in leaving their country, studying abroad and getting to know European culture. How would you, being an American, start tackling this problem? Is it the individuals’ lack of interest or something bigger than that? I would love to hear your thoughts on this.
Maybe there are two points to explain this:
When Germans think about America, it’s about protecting Europe in the Cold War, the oldest democracy in world, individual freedom, open space and economic success – Europe’s big brother. When Americans think about America, it’s about the same things (and much more) and they call it American Exceptionalism.
When Germans think about near surroundings, they see Scandinavia or Roman ruins – ‘foreign’ countries everywhere. When you visit other European countries regularly and embedded in a multipolar continent, it isn’t a big deal to travel to a country founded by Europeans. When Americans think about near surroundings, they see Nebraska and Oklahoma for example. You can drive for hours and won’t get near a foreign border. Many Europeans don’t recognize, that the U.S. is a diverse country with many regional cultures – just compare New England, the Deep South and the Left Coast. Additionally, America is (still) the focal point of the world economy and world politics.
I agree with your outstanding article, Andrew. Nevertheless, I will contribute my part by vacationing in the U.S. the next four weeks. 😉
Dear Alexander, I see your point, but in my opinion this explanation is not really sufficient. If you look at the states along the border to Canada or Mexico, where people are also confronted by foreign countries, the interest in multicultural exchange is still minimal, on the Mexican border even below average I would argue (build h I lived in the North of New York State, where Canada is literally just minutes away, but still 0% of my highschool class went to Canada to study after graduation. In terms of size Canada is even bigger than the US, but also not as self-centered as the US, so there must be more factors playing into this very particular self-perception.
Hi Marla, thanks for your comments! I think a big problem regarding the seemingly lack of interest in other countries by many Americans – best exemplified by the number of Americans that lack a passport – is one of language. Foreign language learning in the US is not emphasized at all and makes many Americans feel less confident about non-English-speaking countries. Even when they do travel, many would prefer all-inclusive packages where things are arranged for them, limiting their exposure to people not working for the hotel/travel package they’ve booked.
I think Alexander brings up a good point about the size and diversity of the country (why travel abroad when there’s so much to see at home?), but I also think there is another issue at play – the US is actually very far away from other countries, especially when compared to Europe. If you live in Nebraska, it’s actually quite difficult to fly to Mexico for a long weekend simply due to the logistics, whereas in Berlin I can fly to Rome for a long weekend with very little trouble.
It’s because Americans live in the best country in the world. Why would they leave the best country in the world to go live in a not-best country in the world?
Hi Anna, I think it’s hard to say that the US is “the best country in the world”. Regardless of the fact that “best” is highly subjective, there are plenty of things, such as education, wealth inequality, and crime that demonstrate that there are plenty of ways for the US to improve. I have lived in Berlin for just over 9 years now and I am very happy to have left the US.
Hi Andrew,
it is nice reading that you are very happy about living in Germany. I am very interested in which areas you experienced Germany to be performing better than the US and vice versa. Could you name some?
Mathias
Hi Mathias,
In general I think the cost/benefit of healthcare is Germany is far better than the US (mostly due to the much higher cost in the US), the cost/benefit of higher education (again, due to the much higher cost in the US), and the great public transportation system. I could name a lot more, but I’ll spare you the long list! There are also other things I prefer about German culture in general to the US, such as less fast food and the general cost of healthy food.
To put it mildly, you won’t get a positive reception in the US if you go around saying the America isn’t the best country ever, and you are happy to have left.
Everyone’s of course entitled to their own opinion. I know plenty of people in the US who are very open to discussing how the US can improve, but you’re right in that many Americans make it an issue of patriotism to not admit that the US isn’t the best at something.
Andrew,
I thoroughly enjoyed your article! As an American that has resided in Germany, I echo many of your same thoughts regarding cultural exchange. To further enrich your suggestion of encouraging young people to learn the language, I see this has a larger challenge that could be address by the American school systems before the traditional foreign language requirement at the high school level. A US student that has not studied German (or another foriegn language) before high school, would be unlikely to reach a level of proficiency required for participation in an exchange program. Therefore, it would be difficult for a level of full immersion.
Brandy
Hi Brandy, thanks for your comment. I completely agree! My colleagues in Berlin have children that go to bilingual schools/day care and I just think it’s great and something I feel like is lacking in the US. While I know that there are some schools that offer this, I think it’s something that should be done more often. While I understand the counter argument – that foreign languages are not used enough in the US to justify the cost -I think learning a new language opens up so many opportunities that we should not dismiss it outright.
Andrew, great points you are making! Let me just mention one thing: the 2% goal. While Trump and the defense industry love the idea of Germany spending 2% of the GDP on defense (which Germany could afford), it is a bad idea. This would elevate the German defense budget to roughly 65bn USD, roughly Russia’s defense budget and only short of the U.S. and China. This is not the role Germany wants to play in the world, neither would European neighbors welcome this. It would also be close to logistically impossible to increase the budget sensibly by such a large amount (currently roughly 40bn) in the short term. Unless you gave all recruits a generous pay raise…
Hi Thomas, thanks for your comment. While I understand that Germany does not want to play a larger military role in Europe or the world, I think it really needs to, especially in Europe. With the UK leaving in the not-so-distant future, only France and Germany have the economic power to sustain an enlarged defense force. I disagree that European neighbors would mind Germany playing a larger role, unless if by neighbors you mean Russia, which obviously would not like Europe to do anything militarily. I don’t think Europe can sit back and allow the US to take the leading role in European security. Looking at the aggressive stance that Russia has taken over the last 15 years or so, it is quite clear that Russia will do what it believes it can get away with and I don’t think Europe can afford to sit back and allow it to do so or to wait for the US to do something.
Hi Thomas and Andrew:
First of all I think you contributed a comprehensive assessment of the German-American relationship today. At some point I would have liked to see more concrete and tangible proposals, but your comments in the discussion have illuminated your ideas and I thank you for clarifying.
Concerning the military expenditure within NATO I see a dilemma: Targeting the 2% goal was agreed upon in 2014, but it is an arbitrary threshold and a false imperative to enhance military cooperation among NATO members, and many European politicians have challenged the idea of spending more. In my opinion, the recently announced joint effort of the European Commission to invest in security and defence is a much more reasonable approach to collective military operations. Also, there has repeatedly been the claim that a country’s contributions to humanitarian aid compensate a lower military budget. This claim is justifiable, because military engagements need post-operational monitoring and a stabilization of the region, which the contributions of civil powers such as Germany guarantee for. Hence, when it comes to NATO’s military spending I believe we need to exchange an ideology-based approach with a mission-driven approach that tackles (cost-)effectiveness.
I would be interested in feedback.
Florian
Hi Florian,
I agree that the Commission’s efforts in security and defense are a step in the right direction, but I disagree that humanitarian aid should be counted as part of this. While I agree that these contributions to are important and indeed have an impact on security concerns, they miss my wider point. Europe is still far too dependent upon the US for its own protection and action in its larger neighborhood (think about the actions taken in Libya a few years ago, for example or Russian actions in Ukraine). Only when Europe is able to take care of itself will the US begin to start taking it seriously as a true partner in defense. And while I by no means agree with the way in which Trump has raised these issues, I do think his general point (that Europe needs to increase defense spending) holds.
I do think your last point about a mission-driven approach versus an ideological one, however, is very relevant – I would just expand the EU’s mission to one of self-reliance in defense issues rather than one of complimenting American military power.
Hi Rafael,
I was wondering: do you think that the Brexit is a chance for the common EU-army? or a step backwards?
thanks
Amélie
Hi Amélie, I think both, actually. It makes a step towards a common EU army more likely because the UK has traditionally been more skeptical of further EU integration, especially because the UK has wanted to maintain its close ties with the US. It’s a step backwards, however, in that the UK is one of the most well-equipped and modern armies in Europe, so any EU army loses capabilities and know-how without the Brits.
Hi Andrew:
I see your point. I was more thinking about larger joint military operations like the anti-ISIS-coalition. There, it would be misleading if every coalition member provided military equipment and personnel but none the means for nation-building. Still, I feel it can be very impractical for countries to prop up their defense individually. In modern warfare, attacks are rarely launched on a single country only. The recent increase of cyber attacks around the globe (e.g. Wanna Cry) affected dozens of countries, which underpins the need for collaboration in cyber security, for example. Obviously, this is a policy field that has only recently gained attention and where individual countries must contribute more. However, since within NATO an attack on one is an attack on all, I would like to advocate for a dialogue among its members of what is actually needed to combat security challenges in the future and where synergies can be found to spare unproductive defense expenditure.
By the way, both of your examples show that a more thorough dialogue on what we want to achieve with our military operations is required: the actions in Libya, which I agree were disregarded and mishandled by the German foreign ministry, left a failed state; and concerning the conflict in Ukraine I do not see how America is more involved in problem-solving than the OSCE, Germany, or France.
Hi Florian, thanks for the great comments. I agree that, for lack of a better term, nation-building capacities are also needed, and it’s important to keep this in mind. That said, the EU needs to be a capable actor on its own in the realm of defense without relying on American power. I brought up Ukraine because of precisely your point – the US was not/is not involved militarily, and the issue is a stalemate. The EU showed in the 90s in the Balkans that it relies on American military might, and I think that this needs to change if we are to have a partnership of equals rather than one where the Americans use “traditional” might and the EU relies on soft power, nation-building, and possibly an integrated form of cyber security. There are areas when synergy and cooperation make sense, but there are specific areas, such as the usage of aircraft carries, where the EU needs to come together on its own.
Hi Andrew, thanks for your honest and refreshing article. I think you’re absolutely right. The election of Trump is not the problem, but rather the solution. Both the USA and the countries of Europe must focus more on the core values of transatlantic partnership. As you said: trade and security remain the key issues. What do you think must be the next steps to form a closer partnership between the U.S. and Europe which follow the British example?
Hi Tim, I wouldn’t go so far as to say that Trump is the solution – I think he is making things worse, especially in security. He has belittled the US’ allies in Europe while speaking highly of dictatorial regimes in Russia and the Philippines – this will not help build on transatlantic relations. As for your question as to how the US and the EU can form relations closer to UK-US relations, I think it’s difficult but will necessarily involve better trade relations (i.e. stop calling Germans “bad” because the German economy is healthy and a leading exporter), increased security cooperation (such as joint training and closer cooperation on UN missions), but also increased cultural exchange.
What about you?
Hi Andrew,
I would say three points could improve the transatlantic relations in security matters and support the understanding in social questions. At first I prefer closer regulatory parliamentary debates and government consultations between Germany, the E.U. and the U. S. at ministerial level. Also there should be more common exchange programs for the police, the military, fire service, public disaster response and public administration. The German Federal Government should establish a Consul General in the heart of the Midwest of the US to intensify the dialogue with Americans from this area.
Greetings
Tim
Hi Tim, interesting ideas. I see and agree with your point about more regular parliamentary exchange and general governmental consultation. I think the American police force, for example, could definitely learn from Europeans about non-violent policing, although I would also caution that the prevalence of guns in the US does limit to a certain level the applicability of certain areas of knowledge exchange. Regarding your last idea, what would the purpose of this Consulate General be in the midwest that differs from general consulates? Or is it the case that Germany lacks consulates in the US outside of the coastal regions?
Hi Andrew,
I liked reading your article, and agree that economic interaction and military cooperation are two important practical aspects of US-German relations. I also agree that living abroad can result in deeper cultural understanding, although I wouldn’t discount positive experiences and impressions created through tourism. The United States is a dominant force, not just militarily and economically, but culturally as well. Many Americans live their lives surrounded by movies, music, and news produced in the United States, about the United States. What are your ideas about cultural education, besides travel and language programs, that can help offset this skew? One example could be a program to increase exposure to foreign media, which could be facilitated over the internet, and would not be cost prohibitive. You mention the anger of people who feel that they are losing from international trade. Perhaps if both countries worked to alleviate the negative effects of fluctuating international economies, such as by improving job placement and job re-training programs. This might help qualm the fears of people who feel betrayed by international economic agreements.
Hi James, I think your first question is a very difficult – and indeed the key – question to answer. To be blunt, I’m not sure what more could be done. If you look at programs like “Deutsche Welle” in the US, almost no one watches unless they have some connection to Germany. My dad, for example, watches it just so he knows what I’m talking about when I call home and discuss German news with him. I think it unrealistic to expect Americans to suddenly watch the BBC, Deutsche Welle, or various other international news sites. I do, however, think that music and film are good places to start because those are things people care about without needing any “prodding”.
Regarding job placement and re-training programs, I’m very skeptical that there is the political appetite to spend the kind of money that would need to be invested in order to see the effects we need. I think we could actually take a step back and look more at intergovernmental exchanges – for example, I think the German unemployment system works much better than the American one and gives people the required breathing room to find a job that they are interested in without having to worry how they will afford health care while they are between jobs. I think initiatives like this, however, will also be a very difficult sell given the amount of taxes that they would cost.
Hi Andrew, Thanks for this great article. I agree that vocational training is a good starting point for a concrete, interest-based exchange. We already see a lot of interest from the American side and I’m convinced that the American economy and education system would greatly benefit from vocational training programs – also to finally have a good alternative to a college degree. How do you perceive public opinion in the States though? My impression is that there’s still somewhat of a stigma attached to vocational programs. Would you agree and do you think there needs to be an effort to change that – in addition to reaching out to manufacturers?
Hi Carolin, that’s a very difficult question for me to answer because I left the US 10 years ago. I think the larger problem is the lack of funding at the school level to put in vocational programs at the high school level. Schools are cutting back to the bare basics in a way that precludes offering new programs, especially ones that are time consuming and required specialized teaching. I think the way that the German Mittelstand works closely with applied science universities in Germany is definitely a good place to start when thinking about how to implement new programs for sure. I think one good way of combating any stigma, if there is one, is to do a better job of placing recent graduates in jobs in the fields they studied in after they are finished. There have been plenty of scandals in the last 5-10 years where for-profit universities were essentially scams that ran up student debt and did not adequately prepare students to work in their chosen field.
Thanks, Andrew! That’s a good point. Successes will probably speak for themselves. But in addition to a lack of funding at the school level, it might also require a stronger commitment and willingness on the employer’s side to invest time and money in the training of future employees. Would you agree?
Definitely, and I think that this is one of the biggest challenges and something that many community colleges in the US are already doing. From my admittedly limited understanding, however, there isn’t the institutional support given at the state or federal level in the US to promote apprenticeship programs like here in Germany.
Dear Andrew,
I enjoyed reding your article as it raises two important aspects. In particular I like your idea of knowledge-exchange programs on a cenralized basis.
However, I think that a more differentiated approach is needed when explaining the rise of populism. Economic drivers (`globalisation’s losers`) are definitely important, others (terrorism, fake news etc.) should be added.
Happy to discuss further.
Best
Alexander
Hi Alexander, I would agree to a certain extent. While terrorism and fake news definitely are contributors to the rise of populism, I think economic concerns are the most salient. I feel that many people are concerned about how they and their families are doing economically – if they aren’t doing well, I think they are far more likely to follow populists.
Hi Andrew – I agree as to the economic concerns being the most salient (and I built my narrative around this) but I would also add the affective/emotional component of the economics: President Trump’s platform was built not just upon the promise of more jobs and a better economy, but on reorienting the international-relational balance such that America no longer gets “taken advantage of” by foreign nations via unfair trade practices and agreements. While certainly economic in nature, this nationalistic/patriotic aspect of it seems to touch on distributive justice and fairness separately from naked economic benefits – what do you think? -Mike
Hi Mike, I do think there is an aspect of fairness there, but not one of distributive justice. Americans have repeatedly rejected any notion of redistribution through taxation (which all debates on taxing/spending are in their essence), much to my chagrin. I fear that this is the classic scapegoating done by populists. This idea of “they’re taking advantage of us, and this is why you’re struggling” is an easy case to make and to understand and usefully glosses over the complexities of international trade.
Hi Andrew,
To clarify, by “distributive justice,” I meant the disproportional composition of NATO expenditures and the like. Some Americans have responded well to the argument that European NATO allies have largely been free-riding via America’s willingness to “foot the bill” and that it’s time we stand up for ourselves. I hope it’s clear that I’m only characterizing the argument and not supporting it; I’m with you on the “they’re taking advantage of us, and this is why you’re struggling” piece, and that’s why I’m mentioning this sort of emotional aspect that contributes to populism. -Mike
Thanks for the clarification – and I completely agree. I would say that I generally agree about the issue of free-riding, but I can also see how history plays a special role in the discussion on military spending in Europe. I don’t think Europeans are free-riding out of maliciousness, but rather out of a “if you’re willing to pay the bill, we’re willing to let you”-mentality. The destruction in the first half of the 20th century was so complete in Europe, it’s no wonder Europeans have no appetite for further spending, especially when someone else was quite eager to foot the bill.
I agree 100%, I don’t think it is malicious either, and I would add that there are some benefits for the United States that have not been at the forefront of the public debate. For example, a situation in which Europe relies on the United States for part of its security gives some added leverage to the United States on various issues that involve Europe. Additionally, some analysts cite the benefits of European military bases, which enable the U.S. to house troops and equipment abroad and project its military power geographically. NATO provides a logistical platform for this and lowers administrative costs for the United States, which has historically sought a robust forward military capability. -Mike
Dear Andrew,
thanks a lot for your article. It is very true, that in general Germans might know more about the U.S. than the other way round. Having lived in the U.S. for some time and working as a freelance journalist, I think one of the main reasons for that is the media. In Germany a newspaper, a TV news show or an online news site often opens up with international news – very often news coming from or concerning the U.S. Watching news in the U.S. is quite a different experience – it is mostly U.S. focused and news from abroad or from Germany are rarely the case.
So yes, building bridges and organizing more exchanges is an important way to go. But in order to waken the interest of young Americans in really living or studying in Germany for some time, we need to get their attention first. In online times, gatekeepers do not really exist any more – so we need to develop strategies to reach them on social networks – even on Instagram and Snapchat.
Simon, I agree with your point of view but I also think that the US is simply more influential than Germany and therefore receives more attention here. A decision of the German government most likely does not impact the US as much as US decisions impact Germany (and its economy). Therefore, I would like to specify “strategies to reach them on social networks”: Germany is a well-suited hub in order to discover more places in Europe.
I really agree with Jonas – the American news media doesn’t spend much time on other countries, it’s true, but neither does the German news media focus news on Peru, and that’s because Peru is not as significant for Germans as the US is. I think big events are covered, such as Brexit, the French (and Dutch) elections, and I’m sure the upcoming German elections will be mentioned in US media, but obviously they won’t get as much coverage as the US election received in Germany.
I find the idea of possibly “exporting” the traditional ideas of apprenticeship programs to the US fascinating. But don’t you think that this might be something that is past its “best if used by” date? Doesn’t the importance of flexibility and adaption in contemporary labor markets increasingly require different skills than those taught in apprenticeship programs? It should be no surprise that as a result the number of high school graduates enrolling have been diminishing over the past decades. And it seems to me as though labor markets are only going to move more and more in the directions where “fixed skills” are not what is most sought, but rather critical thinking abilities and the ability to find new solutions to new problems.
Hi Mark, I think that is partially the case, yes, but I think there are also sets of jobs that are perfect for apprenticeship programs (plumbers, electricians, heating/AC, mechanics, etc.) and there are plenty of jobs that are not going anywhere. I think we need to differentiate between jobs that apprenticeship programs are appropriate for (what I mentioned above) and sectors that are not (such as consultant work).
I can actually see both of your points. I agree with Andrew that it’s important to distinguish between different job profiles and what they require in terms of training. Some jobs will always require specialized skills, but the dual education system in Germany is flexible in that it offers different tracks, for example dual study programs in industrial engineering that require critical thinking and advanced skills. I also think that many apprenticeship programs offer a sort of “independent study” where you get to work on your own project or take part in an engineering competition. But I do agree with you Mark that employers and vocational schools have to be flexible and adapt to the changing circumstances on the labor market. I also don’t think that “exporting” vocational training should be a cookie-cutter approach. Eventually, the U.S. will need to find its own system.
Hmm, Carolin, do the dual education systems also cover engineering-type jobs that in other countries are usually covered at the university level? I think you bring up an important point that any system in the US would need to adapt to local surroundings. One thing I did enjoy about the American education system, however, is how much more freedom I had in taking courses outside of my dual majors, something which, from my understanding, isn’t as encouraged under the new Bologna-process-inspired bachelor/master programs in Europe. I spent the equivalent of an entire year taking courses in biology, earth science, and philosophy (I studied history and politics), and I don’t know as many Germans who had the time to take an entire year to study something outside their focus. I think this is also due to the new system and the differences between the old Diplom and Magister systems. Did I understand that correctly?
Hi Andrew, To your first question: Yes, there are dual programs that combine study and training on the job. It’s a popular alternative to a full-time university degree because it gives you the practical experience that a college degree usually lacks (besides internships) and a curriculum catered to that specific job profile. That brings me to your second point. I cannot speak for the bachelor/master programs because I did the Magister myself, but I would agree with you that the American university system offers more freedom in this regard. To be honest, I prefer your system. 🙂
Thanks, Carolin! I know a lot of my former classmates from my master’s (which I completed in Berlin) were part of the older systems and they seemed to have had much more flexibility. While I did really enjoy my bachelor (I went to UC San Diego), I would’ve preferred the price tag of German universities rather than even the public system in California! And thanks for clarifying the dual program, of course.
That’s a fair point, Andrew! Tuition fees in the US are out of control. Do you see any chance of that changing any time soon?
Unfortunately I don’t see tuition fees changing any time soon. I think in general the American taxpayer is very individualistic and is prone to thoughts of, “if you want an education, you should pay for it”. Investment in public higher education has decreased from it’s peak (http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SE.XPD.TERT.PC.ZS?end=2014&locations=US&start=1986&view=chart), although it is increasing again. The cost of a master’s degree was the single biggest incentive for me to come back to Germany 9 years ago and I ended up staying!