We live in an increasingly globalized, increasingly homogeneous world culture, and a crucial aspect of your resume for prospective employers will be your semester abroad. The location you choose for your 6 months of horizon expansion is largely irrelevant to graduate schools and corporations as a native English speaker. The main point is really that you have ventured outside your comfort zone to see something new. You should choose Germany, though, as your temporary home for a number of reasons.
The best reason to go to Germany is to take advantage of their socialism. There is a time to be pro socialism and a time to be anti socialism, and the time to go pro is when you are poor, the standard condition of a student. It is always better to receive than to give. Going to Germany as a student allows you access to nearly free higher education, greatly subsidized health care, and a transportation infrastructure that will get you all over the country on other people’s dime. Living in Germany once you start receiving a real pay check is much less fun, as you start having to pay for all those amenities you previously enjoyed.
Another great reason to choose Germany for your semester abroad is that the bureaucracy in obtaining a residence permit isn’t bad at all. Sure you will have to do this anmelden thing, where you tell the government where you live, and you may have to wake up early to spend one day at the Foreigners’ Office to get your $50 stamp in your passport, but just ask a German what they go through to get a visa for America, and you’ll quickly realize that your ordeal has been a cake walk.
Finally, studying abroad in Germany is a great way to meet new people from all over the United States. You will likely join a program with courses taught in English and meet people from many different American universities, which will come in very handy as you will want to discover Europe together and still have a chance to debate your picks for fantasy football on the long train rides.
deutsche Übersetzung für Astrid ein/ausblenden
Servus Astrid,
Vorteile des Auslandssemesters in Deutschland
Wir leben in einer zunehmend globalisierten, zunehmend homogenen Weltkultur, und ein ausschlaggebender Aspekt Ihres Lebenslaufes für zukünftige Arbeitgeber wird Ihr Auslandssemester sein. Der Ort, den Sie für die 6 monatige Erweiterung Ihres Horizonts aussuchen, ist weithin irrelevant für die Hochschule und Firmen als ein Englischer Muttersprachler. Der Hauptpunkt ist eigentlich, dass Sie sich aus Ihrer Komfortzone herausgewagt haben, um etwas Neues zu sehen. Sie sollten Deutschland als vorübergehendes Zuhause auswählen, aus einer Vielzahl von Gründen.
Der beste Grund, nach Deutschland zu gehen, ist von dessen Sozialismus Gebrauch zu machen. Es gibt Zeiten, in denen ist man für den Sozialismus und welche, in denen ist man dagegen, und die Zeit, um dafür zu sein, ist, wenn Sie arm sind, was der Normalzustand eines Studenten ist. Es ist immer besser zu nehmen als zu geben. Als Student nach Deutschland zu gehen, gewährt Ihnen den Zugang zu fast freier Bildung, großzügig subventionierter Krankenversicherung, und einem Transportsystem, das Sie ins ganze Land bringt, auf anderer Leute Kosten. In Deutschland zu leben, sobald Sie einen richtigen Gehaltsscheck erhalten, ist sehr viel weniger lustig, da Sie anfangen müssen, für all die Annehmlichkeiten zu bezahlen, die Sie vorher noch genossen haben.
Ein weiterer Grund, um Deutschland für Ihr Auslandssemester zu wählen, ist, dass die Bürokratie, um eine Aufenthaltserlaubnis zu bekommen, gar nicht so schlecht ist. Natürlich müssen Sie sich anmelden, wobei Sie der Regierung verraten, wo Sie leben, und sie müssen eventuell früh aufstehen, um einen Tag in der Ausländerbehörde zu verbringen, wo Sie den 50$-Stempel in Ihren Pass bekommen, aber fragen Sie nur einen Deutschen, was dieser auf dem Weg zu einem Visum für Amerika durchmacht, und Sie werden schnell feststellen, dass Ihre Tortur ein Kinderspiel war.
Des Weiteren ist das Auslandsstudium in Deutschland ein toller Weg, um neue Menschen aus ganz Amerika zu treffen. Sie werden wahrscheinlich an einem Programm teilnehmen, dessen Unterricht in Englisch gegeben wird und Sie werden Menschen von verschiedenen amerikanischen Universitäten treffen, was sich als praktisch erweist, denn Sie werden zusammen Europa entdecken wollen und trotzdem auf langen Zugreisen über Ihre Aufstellungen für Fantasie-Football debattieren können.
Schönen Abend noch,
John
This entry was posted
on Saturday, August 30th, 2008 at 11:32 pm and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
August 31st, 2008 at 2:22 am
Speaking of “anmelden” (registration with the police), this is perhaps the one aspect of living here that I simply cannot get over, even after all these years. The first time I encountered this “Meldepflicht”, I honestly found it to be the most revolting and utterly disgusting concept I’d ever heard of in my life - a page straight out of “1984″. That an entire civilization actually goes to the police and dutifully fills out this form however, indicating, among other things, their religion, citizenship, previous address, whether they intend to leave the country and if so, then to settle where, almost sent me into convulsions. To this day the very thought of the “Meldepflicht” strikes me as very Big Brother, like living in a police state, which seems to run contrary to the definition of a free and democratic society.
Other than that rambling piece of rant, yeah, more people should definitely study in Germany
August 31st, 2008 at 2:30 am
Still it’s important to be “gemeldet”, because your “Erster Wohnsitz” decides where you pay taxes (if you do) and where you’re allowed to vote (if you’re German).
August 31st, 2008 at 3:05 am
Have you ever stopped to consider that in most countries of the world, people happily pay their taxes and vote without ever having to register with the police? In the U.S. for example we file our income taxes on every April 15th and fill out a voter registration form if we’re so inclined to vote. The government has no idea where I live, with whom I live or in how many houses I live unless I choose to share this information with it.
August 31st, 2008 at 3:25 am
“We live in an increasingly globalized, increasingly homogeneous world culture”
you really need to get out more from under your stone.
the world has no idea how to deal with its differences, you clearly never went to asia or africa … and no people who fly business-class are not the world … go ask the other 6.5 billion people.
people have more contact, that does not mean they get to be more alike.
August 31st, 2008 at 9:05 am
I think the USA are more a polce state than germany is.
Your government collects far more data….and stores them!
August 31st, 2008 at 9:15 am
@Curtis: “The government has no idea where I live”
I seriously doubt it, given all the intelligence agencies the US govt has.
The Meldepflicht is something that Americans tend to blow completely out of proportion. So the government knows were you live. Big deal. You’re sharing your address with pretty much everyone you’re doing business with, so its not like its some kind of big secret.
In the US you have to report all transactions larger than 10.000$ to the IRS (and don’t try to split it up, because thats a crime too). Thats some much more private information, yet everybody seems A-okay with it. Thats pretty repugnant to me.
Or the fact that all court proceedings are public with real names included and there are no privacy laws at all…
Or that you give up any and all of those civil rights when you cross the border of your fine country. Just recently a court dicided that the TSA has the right to seize and search your laptop, without any cause or reason, keep all data on it indefinitly, and give it to third parties not only for analyzing, but also for “other reasons”, with I guess includes selling business secrets of to the highest bidding american company. Oh, that applies for American citizens too.
Sounds more like a free-ish society to me. So get of your high horse…
August 31st, 2008 at 10:17 am
Socialism?!!
August 31st, 2008 at 10:19 am
Maybe your next posting could be on how differently Americans and Europeans understand the word “socialism”…
August 31st, 2008 at 11:04 am
@Curtis:
What happens if you try to register a car in the US? Don’t you have to provide an address in order to do so? How do they check your identity? Let’s assume you commit a crime and I know your name,DOB and the city in which you were born. Is it really impossible for the police to obtain your current address? Sounds very unlikely considering the fact that even libraries are sharing information with the FBI.
August 31st, 2008 at 11:08 am
@Martin
I think the Meldepflicht is something that needs to be blown MUCH MORE out of proportion! We do not see it as a big deal that the government knows where we live and furthermore, one of the founding principles of the USA was the protection of the populace from an all too powerful government. To this end, it’s MY choice with which government agency I choose to share my address, or which address I choose to share with them. Although we do routinely indicate our addresses, for example when we file income tax returns, when large transactions are reported to the IRS, or when we apply for a driver’s license, these are still mainly voluntarily activities - there is no law dictating that we have to undertake any activity that requires sharing our address. Also, I can rent a mailbox and use this as my official address, or I could use a friend’s - the point is, the government has no way of officially forcing me to give them my real address. The point of the matter is, the freedom to live anywhere and with anyone without being required by law to inform the government of my current address, my previous address, my religion, my nationality, my gender and a host of other “Big Brother” style information. No wonder none of my friends here have ever heard of “1984″ - it’s conspicuous absence from the school curriculum speaks volumes on why this shameful practice is allowed to go on.
“Or the fact that all court proceedings are public with real names included and there are no privacy laws at all…”
By law all court proceedings in the United States (I think the exception being military trials) MUST be held in full view of the public and all related information must be made publicly available (in rare cases, information deemed especially harmful to victims may be sealed by the court). These laws were a deliberate departure from the European model of justice and act as a check on the government’s power by the people.
“Or that you give up any and all of those civil rights when you cross the border of your fine country.”
American civil rights exist only on American territory. These laws have no effect beyond America’s borders.
“Just recently a court dicided that the TSA has the right to seize and search your laptop, without any cause or reason…”
As far as I know, every country gives their immigration authority the right to seize and search the belongings of anyone wishing to enter their borders. Each country defines which materials they find objectionable and which materials may be transported across their borders. I do not have the right to decline to be searched by the customs authorities whenever I travel to the E.U. and neither does anyone should they decide to travel to the U.S. It has been my experience that customs officials all over the world reserve the right to conduct as thorough a search as they see fit, even the right to examine one’s private areas.
“So get of your high horse…”
We ride high horses because the bar has been set so high…
August 31st, 2008 at 11:18 am
@Fabian: “What happens if you try to register a car in the US? Don’t you have to provide an address in order to do so? How do they check your identity? Let’s assume you commit a crime and I know your name,DOB and the city in which you were born. Is it really impossible for the police to obtain your current address? Sounds very unlikely considering the fact that even libraries are sharing information with the FBI.”
Owning a car is a completely voluntary activity, i.e., no one is every forced to have to share their address with any government authority. Furthermore, you could easily give a false address and the government would have no idea whether it’s real or not. We now have address rental services in the U.S. where you pay a monthly fee for a virtual street address that acts as a mailbox. You could also use such an address to do all your business with the government if you’d like to keep your actual address private.
It is impossible for the police to find you if you don’t want them to, which is why we have detectives whose jobs it is to track down missing persons or those wanted by the police. Unlike in Germany, there is no central database of citizen’s addresses, so the government has no idea who lives where. Investigators and detectives have to spend a lot of time and energy looking through credit card records, phone records, library records, driver’s license records, income tax records, etc. in order to HOPEFULLY find persons wanted by the police. But as I mentioned earlier, if you cover your tracks, then it’s impossible for anyone to find out your address. The easiest way to do this is to rent an apartment or house where all utilities are included in the rent.
August 31st, 2008 at 12:38 pm
@German
“I think the USA are more a polce state than germany is.
Your government collects far more data….and stores them!”
Have you ever lived in the United States? If what you said were true, then law enforcement in the U.S. wouldn’t have half the trouble they currently have in locating people wanted by law. I don’t think you realize how difficult it is there to actually find and arrest suspects, which flies in the face of your theory.
While it is true that the U.S. collects and stores a lot of information, this is mostly related to terrorists and criminals and does not represent a comprehensive database of every single person living in the U.S. along with all their personal details such as what you have in countries like Germany.
August 31st, 2008 at 12:40 pm
@Curtis: Thanks for your answer. We should now look at the question whether it’s legal to lie about your address or to you use a rented address. Because you could also cheat on the German authorities as well.
There are unfortunately also many Americans who don’t seem to understand the message of “1984″. This video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lHippjeKgDs shows Alex Jones refusing to give his thumbprints in order to get a new driver’s license. But beside Mr. Jones not many people seem that concerned. If you go down that road you could eventually end up with everyone having GPS-chips implanted. Then addresses wouldn’t be necessary anymore.
August 31st, 2008 at 1:01 pm
@Fabian
Thanks for that video, it was very informative. Although I agree with this guy for refusing to give his thumb print, we should not forget that having a driver’s license is a choice and privilege and not a right. It is distasteful what the Texas DMV is doing, however there is still no law requiring individuals to register their address with the state or mandating that any part of their body be scanned. Furthermore, on account of the system of direct democracy found in the U.S., the requirement to give a thumb scan will be abolished once the citizens of Texas decide to do so (by electing different judges, district attorneys and other public officials).
Regarding whether it’s legal to lie or use a virtual street address in the U.S., I guess we’d have to look at the laws of each individual State of the American Union. I know for a fact however, that it IS illegal to indicate anything but your actual address on a Meldezettel. Furthermore, in Germany and Austria it’s technically impossible to get public or social services (although many authorities/companies will simply accept your oral statement) without first showing one’s Meldezettel.
August 31st, 2008 at 1:18 pm
whew! Hate to think what would happen if this discussion turned to the difference between the An/Abmeldebescheinigung and the An/Abmeldebestaetigung!
August 31st, 2008 at 1:33 pm
I have never made a connection between 1984 and the german Meldepflicht.It was just an annoyance to spend half a day at the Einwohnermeldeamt.
If you are a law abiding resident in Germany Meldepflicht has no consequences for you.
Didn’t matter to me if it was german law.
And even though Curtis argues that simular procedures statesside are completely voluntary,let’s get real for a second.
Everything in the United States works through your SSN.Curtis must have ignored the fact that just a couple of years ago SSN’s were on everybodys drivers license,making it possible to steal somebodys identity.
You need your SSN to get a drivers license,open a bank account,set up utilities,establish a credit history.
Every time you make a bigger purchase,your SSN has to be provided.
Try to not give it out and you will receive nothing but thigh slapping laughter.
Please don’t tell me now that all the forementioned procedures are voluntary,the are essential to life.
Don’t care,the fact that everything is based on this one number is way more annoying and 1984ish than german meldepflicht.
Mixxy
August 31st, 2008 at 1:47 pm
@Mixxy: You’re still missing the point. The Meldepflicht is a law, giving out your SSN is voluntary. Your employer and the IRS are the only people that need to have your SSN (it was created for this reason), all others are purely voluntary regardless of what anyone says (and there are in fact many people who live their lives without doing so, my very skeptical grandmother for example). However, anyone who lives in Germany MUST register with the police. One is a statutory requirement (Meldepflicht), the other is voluntary (SSN).
August 31st, 2008 at 3:30 pm
Yeah and your government thinks everbody is a potential terrorist, so it has to spy on everybody.
I had the Opportunity to take a job in the states, but i felt really uncomfortable how your government and it’s agency act today. So i decided to stay in Europe.
August 31st, 2008 at 3:34 pm
@Curtis
Although I get your point I find it a bit stretched. If you can’t drive a car, open a bank account or set up utilities without giving your SSN number it’s absolutely not voluntary anymore, since these things, as mixxy pointed out, are pure necessities mostly.
August 31st, 2008 at 4:37 pm
@German: “I had the Opportunity to take a job in the states, but i felt really uncomfortable how your government and it’s agency act today. So i decided to stay in Europe.”
Gute Wahl! Having lived here for 11 years, I can assure you that civil rights protections are much stronger in the U.S. than they are here. If you don’t believe me, try either applying for a job while being over 40, or applying for a job as a young woman without children, or applying for a job as a woman with young children, or applying for a job with a foreign sounding last name, or applying for a job while being any other color than white. Or try taking the government to court. As a judge once quite frankly told me when I tried to sue the city, “although the city was negligent the laws here are constructed to ensure the infallibility and authority of the government, therefore I’m sorry to say that you have absolutely no chance”. I took her advice and quietly dropped my lawsuit.
@Alex: I understand your argument but the point remains that you are not required to give any of these companies your SSN. I’ve heard stories of people who have adamantly refused to give out their SSN and were still able to get services. Although most people don’t think twice about handing out their SSN, I don’t believe companies can deny you services because you either don’t have one or because you refuse to hand it over. You do need a SSN however, if you’d like to have a job (for tax purposes), and even then, there’s no address registration required (back to the original point).
August 31st, 2008 at 5:01 pm
@Curtis: This voluntariness is purely theoretical. You may be able to lawfully avoid it, but only if you live the life of a hermit. Realistically, most people avoiding it are probably criminals, or abusing this freedom to .
If you want any access at all to the American Way of Life (driving a car, using banking services, etc.), there goes your freedom.
So, whats this freedom worth, if you can’t use it in any practical situation?
I’d rather have some real world freedom (like some right for privacy, which is virtually non-existing in the US) than cling to a notion of freedom that isn’t relevant anyways.
August 31st, 2008 at 5:06 pm
Flamewar! Flamewar!
@ Curtis:
Perhaps you are right with personal data collected by national authorities. However, what do you think about personal data collected by private institutions. Correct me, if I’m wrong, but this is not really regulated in the US whereas Germany has strict laws on this. Of course these regulations could be seen as another aspect of “socialism”…
In my opinion you have absolutely no choice as long as you want to take part in public life…. and I rather share data with national authorities than with (profit-orientated) private institutions.
Ok, nothing for ungood
I have to say, that on the other hand there are too many regulations here in Germany! It’s a double-edged sword…
August 31st, 2008 at 5:14 pm
“allows you access to nearly free higher education”
Unfortunately, that is a thing of the past…
August 31st, 2008 at 5:33 pm
@Martin: “I’d rather have some real world freedom (like some right for privacy, which is virtually non-existing in the US) than cling to a notion of freedom that isn’t relevant anyways.”
Well that’s the main argument, isn’t it? How can you claim to have a right to privacy when the government knows the whereabouts and personal details of every single person? At any given time Germans can be legally bombarded by GEZ inspectors, Gerichtsvollzieher or a host of other public officials whose job it is to inspect and control. Furthermore, I’m disappointed that anyone living in a western country could refer to the notion of any type of freedom as being “irrelevant”. Like any other American, I steadfastly believe that you can never have enough freedom, which by its very definition includes privacy.
@Cyberheinz: “However, what do you think about personal data collected by private institutions. Correct me, if I’m wrong, but this is not really regulated in the US whereas Germany has strict laws on this. Of course these regulations could be seen as another aspect of “socialism”…”
Good question. I personally don’t have as much a problem with private companies compiling personal information about me as I do about the government doing the same. Like any other capitalist, I believe private companies compile information on their customers primarily for marketing purposes. Like any other American however, I believe personal data collected by national authorities is a deep infringement on personal freedoms and a step towards totalitarianism. Then again our two countries have vastly different histories, ours rebelled again England and was founded on the doctrine of freedom from European tyranny while yours was founded on social programs as a means of urgent rebuilding after a devastating war. Germans therefore have much more trust in their government. We do not. German solutions to problems stress more socialism and regulation. Our solutions stress individual empowerment and more freedom from the state.
August 31st, 2008 at 6:19 pm
@Curtis
What he meant by “irrelevant” is, I think” that this freedom is almost purely theoretical and of no use whatsoever if you want to lead a normal life. About GEZ inspectors: Yeah, they have the right to ring your doorbell. Tough shit. You don’t have to let anybody into your home without a court order. The only difference is that the government knows where you live.
But as you rightly put, I think it is really a cultural thing. We trust our government more than any private company, in the US it’s probably the other way round. Plus, our culture is far more collectivistic than the American, which is very individualistic.
August 31st, 2008 at 7:04 pm
@Alex
“What he meant by ‘irrelevant’ is, I think” that this freedom is almost purely theoretical and of no use whatsoever if you want to lead a normal life.”
I understood very well what he meant, however I cannot agree that the whole long list of civil rights guaranteed in the United States (many of which are found in very few other countries) is of “no use whatsoever if you want to lead a normal life”. It took several centuries and millions of lives so that today I can have the right not to be compelled to serve in any army, to refuse to register my address with any national authority, to deny any or all historical atrocities, to belong to any extremist or fringe group of my choice, to publicly insult any public official, to name my child in any way I see fit, to sue for any type of discrimination, to be judged by my peers (instead of some judge), and the list goes endlessly on and on. Far from being “irrelevant”, Americans see these rights as being essential for leading a normal life.
“I think it is really a cultural thing. We trust our government more than any private company, in the US it’s probably the other way round. Plus, our culture is far more collectivistic than the American, which is very individualistic.”
On this we are in total agreement.
August 31st, 2008 at 7:10 pm
@Curtis
I don’t think you got the point. Nobody thinks civil rights are irrelevant. The point was that this guaranteed anonymity vs the government is just rendered irrelevant when you cannot exercise it practically (e.g. when you have to give your SSN to practically everybody in order to be able to lead a normal life). Then it’s just hollow words.
August 31st, 2008 at 9:11 pm
Question to US-citizens:
How do the authorities in the US check out if you have any children who are at school age and need to be put in kindergarten by the right time?
In Germany the enrollment process is initiated by the “Einwohnermeldeamt” where children of a particular birth date are reported to the local school according to the records. Then they are invited for the further process by the school and the “Gesundheitsamt”.
How does the US government ensure everybody gets enrolled by their parents? Just curios…
Other than that: as far as I know you need to have a particular address to let your child attend a school of your area. How would the school board handle this if you wouldn’t want to tell them your address?
August 31st, 2008 at 10:10 pm
@ Curtis:
I agree with your point on our different histories. In my opinion extreme socialism leads to dictatorship, which history has proven a lot of times. Extreme capitalism will end up in destructive exploitation, corruption and powerful private institutions which influence people and governments. Enron for example lowers my trust in companies and the government had no other choice than to make laws and regulations afterwards. I think the US and Germany both have their own middle course… and it works for both.
“I believe private companies compile information on their customers primarily for marketing purposes.”
What do you think about health insurances which refuse to accept certain people, because they know their genome…. this doesn’t sound like a marketing purpose for me. I don’t want to live in such a crucial society.
Ok, as you can read I carried this to extremes to show my point of view… we don’t live in such countries.
You mentioned “1984″ in several posts.
“1984 - it’s conspicuous absence from the school curriculum speaks volumes on why this shameful practice is allowed to go on.”
This and other dystopias ARE part of English classes in Germany. I had to read “Fahrenheit 451″ and we also talked about the other books in class. I know, that some of my friends had to read “1984″ in their classes, which is the better book by far in my opinion.
You know the book, so you certainly know, that 85% of the population (”the proles”) are not observed with telescreens etc.. They are kept in control by porn, alcohol, gambling and trash music. They are free to do, whatever they want to do and they still are not able to change anything. The author George Orwell was a socialist and democrat writing against so called socialism which was totalitarianism … he was certainly no capitalist.
And the USA today is certainly not the opposite of George Orwells “Airstrip One”.
A central aspect of the society in 1984 is, that war was an enduring situation… not a temporary state. When I think of “1984″ and today… I have many things in my mind… GEZ and Meldepflicht are not the most important among them.
August 31st, 2008 at 10:14 pm
“We trust our government more than any private company, in the US it’s probably the other way round.”
Alex hits the nail on the head. The state is not the enemy for us.
The US constitution was written in the 18th century, and back then this made a lot of sense. Times were different.
Germany’s constitution was designed with a highly industrialized, densely populated (and bureaucratic) country in mind. Since you needed to give out your address on so many occasions anyway (for purely practical reasons), theres no provision in the constitution that prohibits the Meldepflicht.
It’s not a police state, just because the German constitution disagrees with the US constitution, written in a completely different time and with a completely different historical context.
And I think the reverse is true for protection of private information. In the days of the founding fathers, when information existed mostly on handwritten sheets of paper, it wasn’t a big deal.
E.g. criminal records and court proceedings were public, but practically no one could look up all your criminal records in all 50 states. You had the freedom to move and have a fresh start. So it wasn’t a big deal, privacy was only a secondary concern.
Today, criminal records, credit ratings, etc. are just a few clicks away, and much more can be obtained for a couple of dollars from background checking companies. Privacy is a very real issue today.
September 1st, 2008 at 2:33 am
@Curtis
to be judged by my peers (instead of some judge)
I see a huge problem in this. As good as this might have been when it was introduced I don’t think it fits in the modern world any longer. With the mass-media we have today it seems to me all but impossible that they would not have opinion with regard to the case and are therefore no longer neutral. While this might be important in small cases it becomes something of stumbling block on the road towards justice in cases of really heinous crimes.
Another problem for me would be the election of judges which is democratic and gives the people a choice but could lead to judges imposing especially hard sentences to secure re-election. The law should be independent from the government but appointed judges who don’t have to fear for their jobs, except in cases of wrongdoing, in my opinion are more neutral.
But those are just my opinions and open for debate.
September 1st, 2008 at 4:29 am
@Katjes: “Question to US-citizens:
How do the authorities in the US check out if you have any children who are at school age and need to be put in kindergarten by the right time?”
The simple answer is, they can not. The realities of life are very different if you live in a system without a “Meldepflicht”. Many of the things that the government accomplishes with the stroke of a computer key in Germany are impossible in America.
“How does the US government ensure everybody gets enrolled by their parents?”
Just as in Germany, I think it is illegal is most states not to enroll your children in school, just that in the U.S. they have no real way to check or enforce this. By the way, your question has nothing to do with the United States government (which you mentioned), as it has no power to regulate matters of education. This is the responsibilities of each individual state.
“as far as I know you need to have a particular address to let your child attend a school of your area. How would the school board handle this if you wouldn’t want to tell them your address?”
Either they simply accept your oral statement that you do live in that area or they might ask for proof of address. Typical examples include telephone bills, electricity bills, water bills, driver’s license (our driver’s license include our address), etc. Of course none of these establish your address with 100% certainty but it’s the best that can be done given the circumstances.
Despite all these disadvantages, it would still never occur to Americans to have a “Meldepflicht” as this concept simply doesn’t exist in our history and culture. The first time I encountered such a concept was in Austria and it took a very long time for me to even understand it. 11 years later, I continue to struggle with the concept and still haven’t been able to accept or come to terms with it.
@Cyberheinz: “What do you think about health insurances which refuse to accept certain people, because they know their genome….”
Good question but I believe this has already been addressed by a law which was recently passed a few years ago that makes this practice illegal.
Regarding 1984, it’s been my experience that people have never read or heard of the book. Perhaps nowadays they’ve introduced it to the school curricula, I simply don’t know. From what I’ve gathered over the years however, the education here seems to be primarily liberal arts and humanistic, and almost completely devoid of anything political. For example, everyone I know can recite the entire text to the “Erlkönig”, but unless they’ve attended university, then they’ll know almost nothing about important political or historical topics. Those things were simply never taught in school is always the answer.
@Martin:
I agree.
September 1st, 2008 at 8:05 am
@ Curtis:
During my school time I had continuous classes in history, politics or social studies and books about totalitarianism are part of German and English classes in Germany.
I can’t recite any line of the “Erlkönig”
Some of my friends went to American highschools for some time as exchange students… they not really experienced a better education there when it comes to politics and history … especially of “the rest of the world”. There is some truth in every clisché…
September 1st, 2008 at 8:44 am
I just wanted to mention that, while we did not read 1984, we watched the movie in our german class.
We did also read “Brave New World” in english class.
September 1st, 2008 at 10:08 am
I also read various books, both english and german, while in school. And we watched some movies, too.
September 1st, 2008 at 10:26 am
“I personally don’t have as much a problem with private companies compiling personal information about me as I do about the government doing the same. Like any other capitalist, I believe private companies compile information on their customers primarily for marketing purposes.”
Don’t you think that’s a bit naïve? Just imagine a company compiling bank account or credit card numbers in order to sell them to the highest bidder who then fakes direct-debit subscriptions for whatever you like.
1984: Another reason many people in German speaking countries don’t know it is that it’s an English book.
I wonder how many people have heard about or read a political novel written by Peter Handke, Friedrich Dürrenmatt or Günther Grass in the US.
September 1st, 2008 at 10:48 am
@Kaktus
“I see a huge problem in this. As good as this might have been when it was introduced I don’t think it fits in the modern world any longer. With the mass-media we have today it seems to me all but impossible that they would not have opinion with regard to the case and are therefore no longer neutral. While this might be important in small cases it becomes something of stumbling block on the road towards justice in cases of really heinous crimes.
Another problem for me would be the election of judges which is democratic and gives the people a choice but could lead to judges imposing especially hard sentences to secure re-election. The law should be independent from the government but appointed judges who don’t have to fear for their jobs, except in cases of wrongdoing, in my opinion are more neutral.”
The idea behind juries is twofold:
1. To protect the people from an all too-powerful state by making sure that only the people may pronounce someone innocent or guilty. In our opinion, giving the state the power to create, interpret and carry out laws without public oversight is simply too risky as it might lead to an authoritarian system. Therefore juries act as a check on the power of the judiciary and state.
2. By making sure that each person can only be judged by a group of his peers, the judicial process is rendered more fair. A judge will likely have nothing in common with the accused, therefore it is impossible for him/her to give an impartial verdict (according to OUR way of thinking). A group of your peers however, know your situation and the daily struggles you have to go through, therefore they are more likely to be understanding of your situation. Also, requiring a jury of 12 people to give an unanimous verdict of guilty is seen as being more fair in our opinion than a single judge doing the same. The chances of being found guilty by 12 people all sharing the same opinion are very low.
The only way to escape the mass media nowadays is be sequestering the jury. Don’t forget that the jury members act to control each other during deliberations, so it’s not as easy to fall out of line as many people think. I have served on a jury before and I can tell you, people take this duty EXTREMELY seriously and are very careful to make a decision based purely on the facts presented to them.
Regarding electing judges and prosecutors, this also functions to limit the power of the state. Don’t forget that Americans are always vigilant against the state. For us, the state is a necessary evil but one that should never be trusted. The state will always try to gain more power, therefore you’ll see that in American laws and regulations, the tendency is always to try to limit the power of the state while giving the public more power. Electing judges will definitely result in judges passing sentences that please the public, but this is the only way to limit the power of the state while strengthening the power of the people.
For example, there are several cases that I see here in Europe, the Fritzl case from Amstetten for example, that really bother me. This man will only end up spending 7 or 8 years in a comfortable jail cell in Austria (have you guys ever seen the jails in Austria? They look like tourist resorts!). He will have a cell to himself, have a television, probably have a fitness center at his disposal, etc. On account of the direct system of democracy in the U.S., this would be impossible. Had he committed such a crime in the U.S., he’d probably be looking at 40 years in the deepest, darkest, dankest cell imaginable. You can argue if this is justice or revenge, but one thing you can’t argue with - this is the express will of the people being carried out - democracy.
September 1st, 2008 at 12:14 pm
@ Curtis:
on a quick note: In criminal cases you are not judged by a single judge in Germany, but by professional judges and Schöffen (amatuer judges), in a Amtsgericht it is a judge and two Schöffen, in the Landgericht there are two Schöffen und three judges, and those have to agree on a result, or vote on the result.
September 1st, 2008 at 4:26 pm
@Gregor:
Yes, I’m aware of the Schöffen system but I’d still prefer to be judged by a jury of my peers anyday.
September 1st, 2008 at 11:17 pm
@Curtis
For example, there are several cases that I see here in Europe, the Fritzl case from Amstetten for example, that really bother me.
Following your line of argument that there is no registration whatsoever in the USA the Fritzl case could have happened all the easier. I don’t say that registration necessarily prevents cases like this from happening, and we all know it didn’t work in this case, but if nobody knows how many children you have, where you live and whether your children are healthy and safe then nobody is going to notice if you lock a child into your cellar.
I see your points about the jury system and I think they are valid to a degree but they are also prone to failure under certain circumstances. For example, and because we recently discussed at university, I want to bring up the case that started the LA riots in ‘92 which was precedented by a not guilty verdict. I don’t want to justify the reaction and probably don’t know enough about the case but to me this verdict seems preposterous and the whole jury of your peers thing was a joke in this case.
Another example and forgive for taking a similar path is that of racially motivated crimes in the southern USA as depicted in several movies. How can there be a guilty verdict if the jury of your peers happens to be white and holding on to the same principles i.e. that african americans a worth less and deserve what the got.
I guess in the end there isn’t any system that deserves to be called perfect and it probably all boils down to the question of what you grew up with.
September 2nd, 2008 at 4:16 am
“Following your line of argument that there is no registration whatsoever in the USA the Fritzl case could have happened all the easier. I don’t say that registration necessarily prevents cases like this from happening, and we all know it didn’t work in this case, but if nobody knows how many children you have, where you live and whether your children are healthy and safe then nobody is going to notice if you lock a child into your cellar.”
Yet isn’t it interesting that the two countries with the most cases of children either being imprisoned, abused or murdered in basements are Austria and Germany, both of which have a strict system of police registration? It seems to me that such cases occur more frequently in countries with a Meldepflicht than in countries without one.
In case you haven’t gotten my point, I’ll put it in simpler words. In Anglo-Saxon countries we don’t see the state as being responsible to supervise or look after our well-being. That’s the business of the individual and his/her family. In our system, the state exists only to administrate and to provide civic infrastructure, not to control or make decisions for society (or to make as few of them as possible). Therefore, we wouldn’t be able to imagine a system where the government knows how many children you have and comes around to make sure that they’re all going to school. This role is taken over by parents, family, friends and neighbors, and has worked more or less quite well for 232 years.
“I see your points about the jury system and I think they are valid to a degree but they are also prone to failure under certain circumstances. For example, and because we recently discussed at university, I want to bring up the case that started the LA riots in ‘92 which was precedented by a not guilty verdict. I don’t want to justify the reaction and probably don’t know enough about the case but to me this verdict seems preposterous and the whole jury of your peers thing was a joke in this case.”
Ah yes, I’ve never met a European that hasn’t tried to convince me of the failures of the American justice system with this single case. Of course these same people possess an incomplete knowledge of how our system works, which makes it easy to conclude that it must be an unfair justice system.
Fact is, as opposed to the European model, juries in the U.S. don’t just decide whether you’re merely innocent or guilty. Their job is to decide whether the evidence presented establishes guilt beyond a shadow of a reasonable doubt. The key words here are “evidence presented”! Contrary to the European model of justice, you cannot make a decision of guilt based on hearsay or based on what everyone knows or based on some documentary on television, some newspaper article or some obvious fact. In our system only evidence that has been legally obtained and presented (under very strict rules) and only statements from witnesses that have been cross-examined can be used by the jury.
When you look at it from that point of view, then it becomes clear why cases like that of Rodney King and O.J. Simpson or Michael Jackson occur. The juries aren’t saying that these individuals are innocent, they’re saying that the EVIDENCE WAS NOT SUFFICIENT TO CONVICT, i.e., they could not establish guilt BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. In case you still haven’t understood, everything depends on the quality of the evidence presented. Based on my experiences, this seems to be a rather confusing concept for Europeans since your system of justice works quite differently and since judges here don’t need to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, they simply need to find probable guilt.
“Another example and forgive for taking a similar path is that of racially motivated crimes in the southern USA as depicted in several movies. How can there be a guilty verdict if the jury of your peers happens to be white and holding on to the same principles i.e. that african americans a worth less and deserve what the got.”
Are you seriously bringing up something you’ve seen in movies into the discussion? Justice is a constantly evolving process - every country has had similar shameful episodes in their past. As modern societies however, we try to improve the system so that such shameful events remain in the past where they belong.
September 2nd, 2008 at 3:22 pm
@Curtis:
“It seems to me that such cases occur more frequently in countries with a Meldepflicht than in countries without one.”
Are you seriously implying that the terrors of the Meldepflicht somehow make people lock up and abuse children? Let’s not bring the discussion down to that level.
Regarding the case of Fritzl, I fully agree. It’s not a problem of grand jury vs judges though, maximum sentences are written down in law. (Also, he still might be tried for murder or manslaughter; and he may be declared a geistig abnormer Rechtsbrecher (mentally abnormal criminal), greatly limiting his chances of ever getting out.)
“your system of justice works quite differently and since judges here don’t need to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, they simply need to find probable guilt.”
Of course there is presumption of innocence and proof beyond resonable doubt. Wikipedia even has a section on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence#Differences_between_legal_systems .
True, rules for evidence are quite different and tend to accept more than US courts, but not due to some sloppy attitude, but due to fundamental differences in the design and intention of court proceedings.
Evidence is used in Austrian and German (and civil law in general) courts to determine the objective truth of what happened, and to do this every piece of evidence has to be carefully evaluated and checked for validity. This includes things that would be rejected for formal reasons in the US.
But back to topic:
I guess juries work quite well as long as the people on the bench are actually your peers. (Jury selection is already heavily biased because many people will avoid jury duty, and the selection process favors the party with the bigger legal team to do more thorough checking).
When you’re part of a socially discriminated minority, jury decisions are sometimes nothing more than mob rule (racism being the obvious example here).
Another problem is that juries also get to decide the damages award in civil cases. Amateur judges have no experience in applying the law fairly and consistently, thus can’t be expected to make a reasonable decision on this.
Consider Jammie Thomas, who was fined 220,000$ for “making available” (no proof of download was provided) 24 (!!!) songs in Kazaa, because the jury “wanted to send a message”. Two jurors reportedly wanted the maximum fine of 3.6 mio $. A fair ruling by peers. I think not.
This makes civil lawsuit highly random. A seemingly minor offense can result in a 10 mio $ damages award. No wonder so many cases are settled without clear evidence. There’s simply too much to loose in a jury ruling. People call it lawsuit lottery for a reason.
September 2nd, 2008 at 7:50 pm
“It seems to me that such cases occur more frequently in countries with a Meldepflicht than in countries without one.”
And because of the decrease of the stork population in Niedersachsen, the birth rate there had to sink too!
http://www.zeit.de/2006/25/Stimmt-s_P-25_xml
September 2nd, 2008 at 9:30 pm
@Martin:
“Are you seriously implying that the terrors of the Meldepflicht somehow make people lock up and abuse children? Let’s not bring the discussion down to that level.”
I’m not implying anything. I’ve simply made the observation that noteworthy cases involving imprisoned, abused or murdered children, especially connected with basements (or freezers in basements) have come from countries that feature the strictest police registration laws, Austria and Germany. This was in direct response to the theory posted earlier, that a lack of police registration would more likely lead to children becoming abused. My argument is that children’s welfare does not seem to be influenced by a system of police registration or the lack thereof.
“Regarding the case of Fritzl, I fully agree. It’s not a problem of grand jury vs judges though, maximum sentences are written down in law.”
I agree that this has nothing to do with the type of legal system. My point here is that because of the U.S. system of direct democracy, regular citizens have much greater influence on the laws that are written in the first place since the public has almost total control over all three branches of the government:
1. There is public control of the legislature: our system makes it easy to lobby for laws to be created, changed or abolished. We can also bring our own drafts to the legislature for passage. A little known fact is that a jury can declare ANY law null and void for ANY reason whatsoever.
2. There is public control of the judiciary: by electing judges, we make sure that the judiciary carries out the will of the people. The public also makes up the jury, which is the only body capable of deciding whether someone is guilty or not guilty.
3. There is public control of the executive: by electing governors and mayors and presidents that represent the view of the people. They can be removed (as nearly happened to President Bill Clinton) or recalled (as in the case of California’s Governor Gray Davis).
All of this direct control over the government leads to a system of justice that is much more representative of the people’s views, which is why Herr Fritzl would be looking at something closer to 40 years to life had he committed the same crime in the U.S. This also explains Europe’s frustration with the death penalty in the U.S. As opposed to Europe, where the state is able to do almost anything it likes without the need for a referendum, the different governments in the U.S. are directly bound to the will of the people, which is why the death penalty will NOT be abolished anytime soon. Well, that’s only one example.
“True, rules for evidence are quite different and tend to accept more than US courts, but not due to some sloppy attitude, but due to fundamental differences in the design and intention of court proceedings.
Evidence is used in Austrian and German (and civil law in general) courts to determine the objective truth of what happened, and to do this every piece of evidence has to be carefully evaluated and checked for validity. This includes things that would be rejected for formal reasons in the US.”
Here is where we must disagree. Regarding the types of evidence that are admitted to court in Europe, there are always cases where such evidence was illegally obtained but STILL admitted to court. Sometimes I’m left wondering what type of legal protection or presumption of innocence a suspect enjoys in European courts. Just recently there was a huge case in Germany where, if I remember correctly, tax information was clearly illegally obtained from some source in Luxembourg or Liechtenstein, but was STILL admitted in court as evidence. In our view this would be a clear violation of the “presumption of innocence” doctrine, for how could any reputable court claim to be impartial and claim to uphold this doctrine while still convicting a suspect on what the police admit was illegally obtained evidence? THIS is the precise problem we have with the system here.
“I guess juries work quite well as long as the people on the bench are actually your peers. (Jury selection is already heavily biased because many people will avoid jury duty, and the selection process favors the party with the bigger legal team to do more thorough checking).
When you’re part of a socially discriminated minority, jury decisions are sometimes nothing more than mob rule (racism being the obvious example here).”
Look, I will agree with you that our system is not perfect, however the American legal system goes to extraordinary lengths to try to make things as fair and even as possible. We recognize that juries can be biased which is why each side has the opportunity to help choose potential jurors. It’s simply NOT humanly possible to do any more to ensure a totally unbiased jury. Perhaps in the future when they invent mind-reading devices we could use these to see if a person is biased or not, but apart from thoroughly questioning an individual, there’s really nothing else you can do. Thankfully, there are several level of appeals instituted into the legal system and because a unanimous verdict based on proof beyond a shadow of a doubt from 12 random people is required, it’s quite difficult to actually find someone guilty. Don’t forget that there are several other safeguards built into the legal system to ensure fairness and protect suspects from bias, e.g. the prosecutor CANNOT appeal a verdict (as opposed to the civil law system), juries may declare a law as invalid if they believe that the suspect is being unfairly harmed by it, there are extremely strict rules regarding what can be admitted as evidence (look up the “fruit of the poisoned tree” doctrine), the 5th Ammendment (contrary to the practice in civil law systems, suspects cannot be made to witness against themselves, meaning that the burden of proof falls heavily on the prosecutor), a suspect’s spouse also cannot be called as witness against him/her, suspects cannot be brought before a court in chains or shackles or put behind any type of barrier, and countless other measures. The point is, yes, we are aware that there are shortcomings (biased jury, etc.) but my experience has shown that the U.S. legal system goes further than any other to counteract these negative effects.
“Another problem is that juries also get to decide the damages award in civil cases. Amateur judges have no experience in applying the law fairly and consistently, thus can’t be expected to make a reasonable decision on this.”
Quite the contrary. Justice flows not from a judge but from the people. The people therefore have the right to punish by setting the damages awarded in civil cases. If the evidence shows that a person or company consistently acted with impunity, then the jury has the right to punish accordingly. They can “send a message” that this type of behavior will not be tolerated. I’m sorry to say but this is the reason why companies in the U.S. have to be so extra careful regarding things like discrimination, whereas companies in Europe, because they know there is no jury to upset, can discriminate much more freely or treat their customers in any manner they choose. I couldn’t believe the first time I picked up a newspaper here and read a job advertisement: “We’re looking for a male, between the ages of 21 and 30…”. Try this just once in the U.S. and a jury WILL make sure that it never happens again. Other companies will take note of the draconian damages awarded and be very careful not to repeat such a mistake.
September 4th, 2008 at 2:31 am
Germany just rocks. Plain and simple. There are not many places in the world where you can pregame on the bus on your way to the bars….
Just don’t be a silly American and literally translate the word “pregame”
September 7th, 2008 at 1:27 pm
@Curtis: With citing single cases of child abuse your are arguing biased and unfair because those cases could have happened in the US and elsewhere and still be happening while nobody knows anything about it. This is because of dark figures which are likely to be much higher in a society where tracking such cases is constrained by the lack of abilities of civil services and law enforcement agencies to determine possible suspects. According to the CIA World Factbook the child mortality rate in the US is 50% higher than in Germany, not to mention the murder rate which is at least 4 times higher. I don’t want to say all this is explained by the lack of a “Meldepflicht” and I don’t even think so but I could argue that way as you are arguing by citing single cases of extraordinary cruelty, as if they counted for thousands.
September 8th, 2008 at 4:32 am
@xion
I think you can argue this until you’re blue in the face, but the fact is that stringent police registration does NOT improve child welfare or prevent abuse. Child abusers will always find a way to commit their actions regardless of what the law says.
September 8th, 2008 at 10:28 am
Concerning the cases of child abuse I want to tell a little story I heard some time ago:
Statistics proved that a lot more people died in Munich because of drug abuse than in Hamburg. Somebody looked into that matter and found that Munich did invest more money into postmortem examination. Doing so that found more drug related deaths which went unnoticed in Hamburg because nobody looked.
It’s a little bit the same with child abuse. If you look into newspapers you would believe that a lot more children are abused in the last two decades than 100 years ago. Truth is: The number of abused children is dropping. People just pay more attention and the “Dunkelziffer” is now lower.
If nobody ever checks if a child goes to school you don’t find any child that doesn’t receive an education. If you check a lot and know about almost all children in the country you will find children which aren’t allowed to go to school. That doesn’t mean that there are more of these children in the second case.
September 8th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Another thing - I’ve noticed that social and health care workers tend to be much more vigilant regarding child abuse in the U.S. than their counterparts in Germany/Austria. On the slightest suspicion of child abuse, which is VERY broadly defined in the U.S. by the way, the state WILL take custody of children, and the parent will then have to satisfy the inquires of a judge in order to ever see their children again. Case in point, the recent case in Texas where a simple call to a police hotline (which turned out to be a hoax) was all that was needed to seize over 400 children from their parents.
To illustrate my point further, some friends of mine here were complaining that they had to take time off from work in order to stay home with their kids. What was the problem? The children had all caught lice from school. The school director and teachers all knew the source of the lice infestation however nothing was done about it. To my horror all my friends simply shrugged their shoulders and said that this is a normal part of a kid’s life and that this was no big deal. The parents all got lice as kids, everyone had to go through this at some point in their lives, so it was completely normal. I, on the other hand, had almost flipped out! I couldn’t believe they were taking this so lightly! I told my friends that if this were in the U.S., the authorities would have closed down the school and designated it a quarantine site, the children who brought the lice to the school would have been removed from the custody of their parents, their homes investigated by child welfare workers and the parents promptly hauled before a judge on charges of child abuse.
Another case in point, my sister’s daughter had a small accident at the age of 5 when she fell in the bathtub and sprained her arm. After my sister took her daughter to the hospital, she was shocked when two policeman suddenly arrived and took her in for questioning. She had to spend several hours trying to explain and convince them that it was a simple accident and that the child was not beaten or abused. Unfortunately, several other parents are not so lucky.
My point to all this rambling is, although we don’t have mandatory police registration and although the state has no way of knowing who is enrolled in which school, or if they’re enrolled at all, we DO have a very watchful social system. If people notice that a child’s not attending school, they will report this to the police or the child protective services. If a child is walking down the street during school time, they will be asked by strangers why they’re not in school. State workers in the U.S. take charges or assumptions of child abuse VERY seriously as opposed to the laissez-faire attitude that I’ve noticed here in Europe, for example child seats and seatbelt regulations for children in cars, smoking around children, leaving children alone at home, etc. At least this has been my experience.
September 9th, 2008 at 12:25 am
I won’t even TRY getting into what differences, disillusionments and epiphanies I’ve had over the course of my law studies. I’m still of the opinion that a jury system ensures a “more fair” way of judging crimes and criminals, and can’t quite grasp the need to keep criminals anonymous- at least it makes for more interesting lectures according to my peers.
Concerning the education system in Germany… well, they DO have a lot of mandatory history and social sciences classes but seem to focus to the point of exclusivity on one single period of German history. Be it German classes, English classes, history classes, political science classes… most of my friends told me they kept repeating learning about WWII ad nauseam. French revolution? A note in passing. Everything pre-14th century? Huh? Even events as important in pan-European history as the Borgia’s rise to power, the Saracene influence swapping into Europe from the direction of Spain or the development of the Hanse and the Free Cities seem to be virtually unknown. I’m not defending the way history is taught in the US (my schools at least focussed very much on US history, everything else was mentioned in passing if at all, and most of the things I found useful were acquired in self-study), but I’m just wondering why everybody is fighting everybody else on that topic.
As for the “police state”… let’s just say I feel very much uncomfortable going to the “Bezirksamt”. Not only do you have to wait in line for hours, as an “alien” (in the space alien sense when it comes to your “friendly Sachbearbeiter”) you’re little better than an idiot, which, of course, has to be why you’re shouted at as though you were deaf when in fact you DO speak, understand and even LIKE German. What the heck am I doing this for? So the State can send some annoying agents wishing to know if I want to subscribe to forced pay-TV? So I’ll be more easily branded a criminal?
I know this will provoke a lot of negative sentiments (but I can’t resist playing the advocatus diaboli): I’d rather live in a system where a mostly intact and functional family, neighborhood and community watches out for my and my children’s welfare, where it’s criminals’ records being stored and made available (instead of mine. What was that case about data disks being lost again?), where I can choose whether to give my P.O. box as the address on my license or my street address, where I know I won’t be hounded by weird money-collecting TV agents, where I can choose whether or not to reveal my religion (or lack thereof) to the world and where I won’t be regarded with suspicion as a potential employee just because I’m female and less than thirty years of age.
As for child abuse cases… they make my blood boil, and a very strong case for jury trials in my opinion. I know this’ll sound prejudiced, blind and not very much like a law person at all (I CAN make a different case if I want to. It’s just that this is the area of law that I can understand the least) but… at least with a jury trial I’m pretty sure it wouldn’t be the rule that prison sentences for evading federal taxes wouldn’t be higher than for raping a child.
As for “illegal” evidence being admitted in court… since in Europe it’s pretty much the judge’s prerogative to decide what is to be admitted and what isn’t (from what I’ve garnered) it’s turned into a very nice free-for-all information gathering. Sometimes I wonder where the supposed impartiality is (sorry. I did a two-month turn as an intern with the Staatsanwaltschaft) since a case seems to be pretty much decided in advance (at least concerning information gathering, which is done on behalf of the court by the police. Almost no way for any lawyer to get involved in that process there unless he or she is a Staatsanwalt).
All in all, both systems offer their advantages- I just wanted to make a very one-sided point up there
September 9th, 2008 at 1:01 am
@Curtis
That’s the point… how you think and authorities in the U.S. would react. State shouldn’t and can’t be allowed to take custody of children on the SLIGHTEST suspicion because parents have the right of care and education for their children on their own.
Of course the state has to react on suspicions but not like taking custody of children because of lice! This would be more than just a normal overreacting… your friend swere right to tell you that this is a normal part of (a kid’s) life. To catch lice has nothing to do with bad parenthood and bad hygiene at home. It can just happen when people come together and can never be totally prevented.
So why should the children who brought the lice to the school been removed from custody of their parents? No ones fault… So this is a typically overreacting.
So you do have a very watchful social system and people will report to police or child protective services… I wouldn’t like to live in a society like that, people blacken other people. It’s fine if there is a qualified suspicion but in most cases there is none, like children bringing lice to school. I rather trust on state and authorities than some random and anonymous people to take care of child protection. In case there are no people caring about other people kids… what do you do then? No help for kids that are in need of it. I’d call it a system error.
And what about child seats for example? There are a lot of regulations that regularize which seats to use.
There is also nothing wrong with leaving children alone at home. At a certain age (or stage of maturation) children can be left at home… if they were left alone without achieving this stage, parents were acting chargeable. So what’s the problem?
September 9th, 2008 at 1:30 am
@zmat: I certainly never had lice, either as a kid or now as an adult and I’m grateful to school authorities, parents or whomever for preventing it. Honestly, it sounds absolutely disgusting! If an oversight in hygiene not only affects a person (or their family) I believe others should have a right to intervene on behalf of those who can’t protect themselves (read: The 400 other kids at the school). Ugh, just because one family can’t be quarantined (which I think is more likely to occur than custody being temporarily transferred to the authorities) or bothered to bathe every child has to suffer through a parasitic infestation?
Thank goodness there were forces preventing this from happening to me so far!
As for trusting authorities rather than your neighbors: I think this is where fundamental cultural differences and expectations come into play. In America, I was raised to distrust any authority I could not immediately put a face to, amorphous state agencies or anything that might not be directly elected by me. (not true to that extent, but you get the basic sentiments, right?) In Germany, people are much more willing to follow the word of their government- they even willingly transfer power from their own individual sphere of influence into that of “The State”. I believe I have as many problems with this concept as you do with the American way of trying to keep as much power as possible contained within the individual citizen.
On the one hand, the German system arguably offers comparably more stability, but on the other hand blind trust into the workings of authorities does have its drawbacks (as history proves). I’m sure that many political decisions that aren’t even made public until the deed is done would have never gone beyond the planning stage in the US due to enraged citizens protesting. Checking on authorities and watching what is being done in our name is one of the favorite pastime of the many, after all.
(Someone once joked that there could be a revival of a monarchist government in Germany, and as long as the Bundeskanzlerin said it was OK nobody would ever protest)
September 9th, 2008 at 2:34 am
Well, I never had lice myself too and I don’t know anyone as well… but I know if this happens this isn’t the end of the world. Also the whole school wouldn’t be affected as head to head contact is needed for transmission.
So what would you suggest to be a approbiate prevention? Probably all children should wear a bathing cap, this might work to prevent you from head lice. Seriously, this can always happen in any society… just doesn’t mean it always happens. And I don’t want to deny people the right to protect themselves and their kids. So if this happens at school the affected child stays at home for 2-3 days to make sure all lice are gone before returning to school again. It’s also mandatory to inform authorities about this occurrence… oh oh, Meldepflicht again.
I’ve never said that I trust all authorities but I am sorry for you that you were raised to distrust ANY authority. I’m really very curious to know how you can live in a country where you are in fear of any authority.
There are decissions and authorities I don’t „like“ and trust too much but in turn there are authorities like the Bundesverfassungsgericht where I know that they will decide very wise, as can be seen at former decissions.
In Germany there is no general will to transfer power from their own sphere to the state. What should that be?
And the Meldepflicht… my last registration took me about 3 minutes,they know my name, age, location… ok very bad, now they can do what?
An advantage of this procedure obviously is that each citizen that is allowed to vote automatically gets his „Wahlbescheinigung“. So no other registration is needed as you’re ready to vote. Sounds like a good and democratic system to me.
Real freedom and safety for me is to know that there are regulations and restrictions of intelligence corps…
September 9th, 2008 at 9:10 am
There is a rather big difference between fear and distrust. Being afraid of government authorities implies they use strong-arm tactics to keep their citizens in line, or something equally undesirable. Distrust means that I, as a citizen, will not trust state agencies to look out for my own good. I will have to do that myself. Distrust can be assuaged, but as a rule I don’t trust the federal government to always look out for my best interest.
For example, I would rather not have state-run television stations than being forced to pay for what (to me) qualifies as inferior entertainment as expensive as pay-TV (you can get quite the nice package for 15 Euros, I learned). Sorry, but my interest in soccer matches and Volksmusik is zilch. Yet instead of clamoring to empower themselves, German people accept the GEZ as a way of life.
My point is not that the state knows my personal information, it’s what this information is and could be used for. As a citizen in a democratic society, it’s my right to choose NOT to become a voter, and as such I personally don’t care for being inundated with “Wahlbescheinungungs”-mail if I don’t want to be. I don’t want to have my name saved alongside the names of criminals in one giant name database. I don’t want to see the ease of access which European police agencies have to MY PERSONAL DATA. What interest does an enlightened, democratic, social federal republic have in what my religion is? Even if I tick “keine Angabe” they will still have a feeling for my personal life that I feel they are not entitled to.
Don’t get me wrong, please- I love Germany, the German way of life and its secure feeling. I’m just playing the agent provocateur here! Still, having lived in Germany for a few years now the level of trust the German general populace seems to have in their federal government and its agencies is astonishing for me. I simply can’t see a parliament setting its wages for itself (and before you argue that this is the case with Congress: Regularly, members only get a cost of living adjustment based upon a statistic increase. Any change to their salary they choose to enact will NOT affect the current Congress but the next. A technicality maybe, but to me it’s an important one. We elect them to be servants of the people and not to give them access to the taxpayers’ money to shovel it into their own pockets), or people being of the opinion they should always carry some form of ID or another (for fear of being stopped by the police and ID controls). I can’t believe the “Meldepflicht” is but a harmless formality when it’s used to facilitate finding all 18 year-old males to force them into service.
As for registration not taking a long time… maybe it’s because I live in a densely populated major city but during the times of the day I can go there I’ve never seen less than 20 people waiting.
September 10th, 2008 at 8:32 am
@Curtis:
“parents all got lice as kids”
I can assure you, not me nor everyone i knew
as a child ever had lice. Now, as a parent, i
know that sometimes a school or kindergarden
has this problem, and the child is immediately
taken from school until the lice are gone. I
wonder how the teachers in your case exactly
know the source. I guess you don’t know
anything about lice and how you can get them
(_not_ caused by a lack of hygiene, but just
sitting in a bus next to one who got them).
“in the U.S., the authorities would have
closed down the school […], the children
[…] would have been removed from the custody
of their parents, […] and the parents
promptly hauled before a judge on charges of
child abuse.”
Well, why is it i’m not surprised about this
scenario? Probably because i know this type of
hysteria and paranoia from the “war against
terror”? Or the way you (not you personally)
treat little boys who help her little sister
pee (just google for “Raoul”)?
@Lea:
“most of my friends told me they kept
repeating learning about WWII ad nauseam.
French revolution? A note in passing.”
Just not true. I mean, the first is true, as i
had to endure, but not the following. Just
have a look at the “Lehrplan”.
“So the State can send some annoying agents
wishing to know if I want to subscribe to
forced pay-TV?”
No, it cant. They are private investigators.
And, in contrary to the US, you can just slam
the door in their face. They won’t beat you
down and draggle you to the police like in,
ehm, like elsewhere.
“What was that case about data disks being
lost again?”
Well, you’re right. Much people in Europe are
very concerned about this (sadly not enough
people). But just compare that to the millions
and millions of stolen customer data across
the große Teich. Not better.
“For example, I would rather not have
state-run television stations than being
forced to pay for what (to me) qualifies as
inferior entertainment”
It is not state-run, and it is not only for
entertainment, but for the “Grundversorgung”.
Please inform yourself. In fact, their overall
quality of entertainment is not so high, but,
hey, just compare the news with yours. Nuff
said.
“What interest does an enlightened,
democratic, social federal republic have in
what my religion is?”
It’s just for tax purposes. And no, I don’t like
that, too.
“or people being of the opinion they should
always carry some form of ID or another (for
fear of being stopped by the police and ID
controls).”
In fact, there is no law (in Germany) that you have to
carry it. You just have to own one (btw, last time I have been stopped by the police was, ehh, 20 years ago or so; and ist was a “Verkehrskontrolle” at night for catching people who drive drunken. Oh, and I didn’t had to show my ID, just my driving licence. But I’m the German equivalent of a WASP, maybe this helps, there may be other experiences).
And I’m not afraid of the police (when controlled, if you don’t carry your ID, the police normally would drive you home to let you show it to them, it’s the easiest way).
May I point out that it is not common to be controlled by the police, except when driving a car. There has been a huge discussion about “Schleierfahndung” and if it’s constitutional. In general, the police can’t control everyone when they like to, without actual suspicion; there are rules they have to obey.
Most people carry ID, because it is helpful when paying with credit- or EC-card because some shops require that to prevent abuse. Just like you in the US have to show your driving licence in that case.
Nichts für ungut,
Piet
September 10th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
*g* I know that there is no law or regulation requiring you to carry around a photo ID, but most of the people I encounter are of the opinion they have to do this.
I should have called the GEZ people “state sanctioned information gathering agents”, but, you know, that’s just so much of a mouthful. I’ve also never heard of a person having to grant any investigator entrance into their domicile with the exception of said investigators carrying a valid judge’s order to search said domicile. You’re just as much allowed to slam the door in their faces as you are in Germany. I think police brutality cases are the same all over the world- German law only doesn’t give you the media coverage or legal recourse American common law does (since police work is largely covered under some secrecy act or another…).
As for the whole schoolwork thing: I only had two years of schooling in a German school, so I’m certainly not the right person to judge anything, but, well… Anything past 1949 is just not really taught (watching “13 days” does NOT count as a Cold War lesson IMHO, even though it’s a good movie). Anything pre-1933 is for the annoying people who wish to choose something other than “3rd Reich” on their oral history exam (which were few and far between). People at my school told me the story rang true for the rest of their education, too. I know not to take everything at face value, but seriously: If my generation is this fed up with their history, what will the next generation say? If you spend 16 out of 24 months on a measly 20 years of history… well, I’ll just shut up now.
Customer data theft: Thing is, you have a more comprehensive way of legally protecting yourself against data/ID theft over the “grosse Teich”. Due to the problem being more well-known and rather more legally developed, mass actions have been brought before courts with all the repercussions they usually entitle. Also, there is not such an easy way of gaining access to ID data as there is in Germany. No giant central server in which all citizens’ personal data is stored… And it doesn’t even end with your data or ID! I was pretty much flabbergasted when someone told me that “there’s no such thing as an IP law” in Germany. Seriously? I had to read up on it, and what the EuGH and national courts DO have is but an unworkable stub. Neither your personal data nor your intellectual property rights are protected, you’re not allowed to write derogatory articles about certain police officers’ work (if you’re even able to find out WHICH officer made the blunder, an unthinkable situation in Germany), you’re pretty much left to the mercy of the government and all of its agents (why do they need ME to confirm my ID? If they suspect me of anything, it’s THEIR job to prove it!) plus the whole thing has a distinct behind-closed-doors ring to it (no media coverage). Whoa!
*gg* I learned about the “Grundversorgungs-Argument” too when we discussed it during “Oeffentliches Recht- Grundrechte”, but the thing is that most of my peers had pretty convincing arguments against it. The “Rundfunkbehoerde” has quite a right to control the stations’ programs (e.g. a certain amount of news broadcasts, when to broadcast TV ads etc.) which in turn means the government/state has a hand in what should be a free media landscape. The Grundversorgungs-Argument also doesn’t ring true anymore since due to German law parties governments are not allowed to own/run a TV station (afaik, sorry, it’s been a while since I took that course!) therefore giving free media, let’s call them capitalist media from now on, a way in. Said media pander to the wide and conflicting interest of the public, especially in unbiased news, making the continued existence of state-controlled programs quite superfluous. Technical difficulties in ensuring a nation-wide TV coverage have been overcome, too, and every “state TV” program has a capitalist equivalent. People should be allowed to choose whether to invest their 10+Euros into the “oeffentlich-rechtlichen” (they’re even NAMED as state-controlled!) or into Premiere or whatever cable or satellite TV programs they choose. A forced media subscription simply doesn’t fit into the vision of an independent, unbiased media landscape IMHO. If they don’t get enough customers, they have to have a better program, plain and simple. I’m sure there would be a lot of subscribers for the “Tagesschau”, but how many would take it in combination with Rosamunde Pilcher movies and Volksmusik shows? And why should I as the average TV customer who likes to watch the news and (American, sorry to say) TV shows pay for said programs? (and keep Florian Silbereisen in his job?)
Yes, if you take a certain TV channels group which derives its name from a wood-dwelling animal impartial, unbiased news coverage might be hard to come by- but there are others. If you want to, you can get as exact a view of the political landscape of the world (from the eyes of a certain country, of course!) as you can get anywhere with non-censored media. It’s an effort, but don’t Germans themselves admit that one big news broadcast is controlled by one major political view, the other by another?
I won’t start on why I feel that forced taxation for membership in a religious community feels wrong to me on so many levels I can’t even count… rather not. No.
Last but not least… “Schleierfahndung”? A veiled investigation? Uh-oh, the personal rights watcher in me’s just foaming at the mouth! I understand the concept of “Rasterfahndung”, and I understand that not every step of every investigation can be made public before the investigation is closed, but… well, I just feel so SAFE being under suspicion simply for living in a certain area, moving through it, shopping in it or being registered in Germany. Am I to believe that each of these is enough to put me under “veiled suspicion” without further cause? Where is my nearest human rights agent? I want to call my member of parliament. Maybe tell them I want a part of their salary, too. They can just add the money to their next “salary adjustment” anyways, and I might be able to veil myself enough to get away from all the veiled suspicion
I use shameless hyperbole in most of my arguments here, so please don’t feel insulted. Nothing for ungood!
(I also have a strong dislike for paparazzi and their actions and like the European personal privacy laws. Heck, I’d love to see some in the US, maybe the poor Hollywood people would get some peace and quiet then. And no more breaking and entering in French chateaus.)
September 10th, 2008 at 10:56 pm
Perhaps this is different depending on the Bundesland, but our history courses (here in NRW) covered over the years the ancient Greeks, the Medieval age, the French Revolution, the Congress of Vienna, Bismarck and the Weimar Republic (and possibly other time periods that I can’t recall right now) - and not just as side notes! (Of course we covered the Third Reich too. Perhaps the prominent coverage of this era in the German Lehrplan for history classes just appears to foreigners to be a bit odd? I would have thought this circumstance is rather understandable.)
Also, I associate the term “state-run TV” more with the 24-hour-praise-our-dictator-programmes of several non-western countries. I would describe the Öffentlich Rechtliche more as state-financed TV. (Besides, they’re not that bad: Hidden somewhere between all the Volksmusik and Soap Operas, they also have such quality programmes as Quarks & Co. or Sendung mit der Maus. I guess the reason why privately-owned tv is more popular is because the Öffentlich-Rechtlichen desperately try to appear “seriös”, but only end up “bieder”. Two German vocables that apparently can’t be translated sufficiently.
)
Also, also: Somewhere above the mandatory military service is mentioned. Somewords to put it a bit into perspective, althought I, being “ausgemustert” in the first place, am perhaps not the best expert…) : If you refuse to do military service for ethical reasons, you still have the option to do Zivildienst. So if you have nightmares of going to Afghanistan and get shot as soon as you finish school - you can avoid this. (Just speculating: perhaps one of the reasons why the manadtory-ness of the service didn’t fall yet is that they fear that if it where voluntary, there wouldn’t be enough voluntaries?)
By the way, the service is mandatory for men, but voluntary for women - now THAT is unfair and discriminating!
September 10th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
After a few minutes of thought I also remembered from our history classes Alexander the Great, the Romans, the Industrial Revolution… And there was problably yet even more! As I said in the post before, the coverage of the Third Reich maybe over-proportional in comparsion to the classes in other countries - but it isn’t the case that they totally crowd out the rest of history!
September 11th, 2008 at 9:05 am
@Bird of Prey: One of my professors put the mandatory military service program into perspective for me when he told me that “the social system would not work without able, intelligent, underpaid Zivildienstleistende”. Talk about a slap in the face.
History does seem disproportionally focused to a foreigner, I can attest to that, but apparently it seemed the same to the locals (I went to a Gymnasium in Baden-Wuerttemberg, btw). Sure, you (reportedly) learn about all the other eras and systems, but for one history doesn’t end in 1949 (and a lot of people who are 20 today have parents who have no clear idea of what the Cold War was either), for two it’s omnipresent in every single subject that even remotely deals with history, for three it’s repetitive and for four no other topic is as intensely discussed and taught. There are other similar periods in history, local and foreign, that would serve to teach the same lesson (e.g. witch hunting/burning, inquisition and crusades…).
Ah well, I guess I’ll never “get it”.
September 11th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
“but for one history doesn’t end in 1949″
Sure! That’s why we also talked also about Adenauer and even the Reunification!
“There are other similar periods in history, local and foreign, that would serve to teach the same lesson (e.g. witch hunting/burning, inquisition and crusades…).”
I guess the Third Reich gets the preference compared to other historical atrocities because it a) happened (relatively) recently and b) happened HERE!!! (in Germany) The message is that the (compared to other parts of the world) peaceful, prosperous and tolerant society the average young German was born into is only half a century old and shouldn’t therefore simply taken for granted.
In the end, perhaps the question if we Germans, in order to archieve an appropriate coverage of the whole Nazi issue, went far too far overshot the mark, or if every bit of the disproportional coverage is indeed necessary, can only be answered subjectively anyway…
September 12th, 2008 at 1:37 am
On the issue of neighbours informing the authorities if something happes to the children
as good as this might be, it also has some similarities to what used to happen in the 3rd Reich and in the GDR namely spying on your neighbours and informing the authorities about wrongdoings, real or attributed.
I’m not saying that this is what happens in the USA but it has a negative associations with regard to German history.
September 12th, 2008 at 11:29 am
I don’t think anyone was trying to say that people actively spy on their neighbors or do anything similar to what happened under the Nazis. What they were trying to say is that if neighbors notice something wrong, for example a child playing around the building everyday instead of going to school, they will usually call the authorities in order to make sure that the child is being properly looked after. This is not the same as spying, it’s simply being a good citizen by looking out for the welfare of other citizens.
September 12th, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Well, if they go to the authorities, it means that they do trust the state after all, right? Going to the authorities is not the first thing that would spring to my mind when it comes to being an active citizen.
And Lea: “öffentlich-rechtlich” does *not* translate as state-controlled. It’s public television, not state television. Though I’m the first to admit that the administration is interfering more than it should.
September 12th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Severin: How is this different from what we call denunciation? Like when you’d give out KPD flyers during Nazi times and a neighbour reports this, it’s not spying either.
Lea:
Here is the actual Lehrplan for history in Gymnasiums in Saxony: http://www.sachsen-macht-schule.de/apps/lehrplandb/downloads/lehrplaene/lp_gy_geschichte_2007.pdf (starting on page 5)
Starts at the Stone Age, ancient Greeks, Roman Empire, Middle Ages, …, in fact you don’t hear anything at all about Nazis in the first four years of history classes in Saxony.
The tenth grade is then used for nothing else but post 1945 discussions.
Discussion of relationships between the USA and USSR - 10 lessons
East-West conflict — reasons and consequences for Germany - whopping 28 lessons
There is detailed information on this on page 27.
September 12th, 2008 at 5:41 pm
@Lea
“On the one hand, the German system arguably offers comparably more stability, but on the other hand blind trust into the workings of authorities does have its drawbacks (as history proves).”
Sorry, but this strikes me as completely surreal. This is a specific point were the US education system got stuck somewere in the 18th or 19th century. The Brits and the French are not trying the establish colonies on the American continent anymore, okay?
Modern totalitarism comes with (initially) very high public approval, its extremly populistic. The Third Reich proved exactly that. The constitution of Germany is designed to prevent that from happening again, even if there would be a majority in public vote (and surely you know who helped designing the German constitution).
I simply dont buy that Americans are so much more ready to fight for their freedoms, than anyone else. Against external aggressors, sure. But against gradual erosion through your own government? Does “war on terrorism” ring a bell?
I noticed that a lot when in the states. Many, many proud, freedom-fighting Americans readily defended everything from the Bush Administration, be it the PATRIOT Act, spying on US citizens (warrentless wiretapping), super-tight (and frequently idiotic and useless) checking on airports, torture, etc. is all A-Ok as long as it helps fighting terrorism and defending the nation. The hypocrisy still amazes me. There was defninitly not more protests against this, than against some (more timid) anti-terror measures introduced by the German government.
September 12th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
“in fact you don’t hear anything at all about Nazis in the first four years of history classes in Saxony.”
maybe they should start teaching that earlier in saxony
September 13th, 2008 at 3:00 am
“maybe they should start teaching that earlier in saxony”
Yes they should. Those who leave after 8th grade are probably the ones who’d need this information the most.
September 19th, 2008 at 5:39 pm
You have forgotten to mention the Oktober Fest and the Wurstmarkt. Two essential reasons to spend a semester in Germany
cheers
Frank
September 20th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
You should of done a lot more research before you wrote this text.
It’s not that easy.
They have changed the law to wear students are now paying around 800 euro’s per semester. (ok, this is nothing compared to what you pay in the states, but it use to be almost nothing.)
When you come to Germany you need to make sure you’ve got enough money. You’ve got to pay for a place to live, school, and food. Yes you receive a health insurance, but only because by law you need one, and you have to pay for it.
September 20th, 2008 at 5:57 pm
oh, and don’t think about working to pay all this. there are limits to how much your aloud to work, and this isn’t enought to pay your studies.
November 10th, 2008 at 7:10 am
Every ten years, the US government collects huge quantities of data from everyone it can find living within its boundaries. It justifies this with Article 1 Section 2 of the US constitution.
According to http://www.census.gov/2010census/
Your participation in the census is required by law.
Although the constitution only authorizes counting, the feds go way, way beyond this. According to US Code Title 13 Chapter 5 Subchapter II § 141:
…In connection with any such census, the Secretary is authorized to obtain such other census information as necessary.
Oddly, they don’t actually demand your address (from what I’ve seen). But if they mailed you the census form, or someone came to your door, then I assume even dullest government functionary could manage to infer your address.
I suppose that Germany also has a census. It may even be as intrusive the the US one. My attitude is “Wer nichts zu finden hat, hat auch nichts zu suchen”, but that ain’t the way the world works apparently. The point is that the amount of information demanded on some US census forms dwarfs that extracted at the Einwohneramt.