Sheri E. Berman

Login or Register to leave a comment.

Sign-up for free weekly updates from ForeignAffairs.com.

Professor Interview

Dr. Sheri Berman is an associate professor and Chair of the political science department at Barnard College, Columbia University. Her most recent book is The Primacy of Politics: Social Democracy and the Making of Europe's Twentieth Century (2006). Her reading list on Modernization Theory and March/April article, "From the Sun King to Karzai," are available for free on ForeignAffairs.com.

1. What do you cover in your course "Democracy and Dictatorship in Europe?"

In this course we look at democracies and dictatorships in Europe from the French Revolution to the present day. Students analyze the nature and dynamics of European political history and use the European experience as a foundation upon which to build a broader understanding of how different types of political regimes emerge, function and are consolidated over time.

2. Who (what) is your favorite dictator or dictatorship to study?

That's tough. If I had to chose one, I would go with the obvious: National Socialism in Germany. Trying to figure out how such an economically advanced country, with an educated population and a culture respected the world over could turn to such a barbarous dictatorship remains a central puzzle for social scientists. Also, the National Socialist dictatorship was a new kind of dictatorship--as opposed to traditional monarchical or authoritarian regimes, it was explicitly mass mobilizing and claimed legitimacy with the "people." Like its Communist counterpart, it was therefore thoroughly modern and much more dangerous than other types of non-democratic regimes.

3. What kind of teaching tools do you find the most effective? Debates, team discussions, group presentations? Do you assign any videos or online interactive teaching tools?

Ideally, it is much more effective to try to get students to engage the material directly than to simply spoon-feed it to them. The readings I assign therefore always contain debates within them, i.e. the authors differ on their interpretations of key events and in the factors and dynamics they stress to explain certain outcomes. The goal of political science is to unravel causality--to get students to try to figure out what makes for a good theory and which variables are more important or useful than others in explaining particular outcomes.

4. Do you use any Foreign Affairs articles in your teaching?

I use a wide variety of FA articles as well as articles from other policy journals in class. I want students to think about the contemporary relevance of historical events, as well as try to apply the lessons they learn from history to current cases. So in this class, for example, a key goal is to get students to think about what the European experience with democracy and dictatorship has to teach us about political dynamics in the developing world today.

5. Any thoughts on how political science/international relations disciplines are changing? Is enrollment up at your school?

The political science discipline has indeed changed a lot in the last 20 years or so. There has been a long-standing slide towards a slavish imitation of the methods and madness of economics. Historical and qualitative work has been pushed aside in favor of spare (and often ahistorical) formal models and quantitative work. Students are trained less in the history and cultures of particular areas and more in mathematical skills. Hopefully, there will be a swing back, but the field is currently still out of kilter.

6. Do you require your students to subscribe to any newspapers or magazines? (If so, which ones)

I require all my students to keep up with current events. Preferably students will consistently read a high quality daily newspaper (e.g. the New York Tmies or Washington Post) as well as scan a few high quality journals (e.g. Foreign Affairs, the Economist), but it has gotten harder and harder to convince students to do this as they come increasingly to believe that glancing at a few blogs represents "keeping up with events."

7. What European country(s) is most interesting to watch right now for domestic political development and change?

I would say the most interesting thing to watch in Europe currently is not a particular country but the European Union itself. The EU is, of course, a unique political phenomenon--and European citizens, EU bureaucrats and outside observers are not quite sure what to make of it. Some believe that Europe--the birthplace of the nation-state--is currently on the verge of replacing this form of political organization with something new.

Indeed, the current economic crisis and Greece's problems more particularly have only served to highlight the difficulties Europe is having maintaining the EU as a half-way house, with economic integration having gone much further than political integration. Determining whether the EU tries to rectify this imbalance by increasing its political authority and thereby potentially creating an alternative to the nation state form of political organization for the first time since the 17th century, is therefore the most interesting question of political development in Europe at the current time.