Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations Vol. 4, No.1&2 Spring&Summer 2005 1 THE IDEOLOGICAL TRANSFORMATION OF THE PUBLIC SPHERE: THE CASE OF TURKEY Ömer Çaha* Jurgen Habermas's book The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere has attracted considerable attention in recent discussions regarding the relationship between the public and private spheres. The book was first published in the 1960s atmosphere of political radicalism. In the foreword to the new edition published in 1989, 1 Habermas considers his work a natural outcome of recent tendencies toward democratization. According to Habermas, the structural transformation of the public sphere is a development from the bourgeois public, which takes the "homogenous" and "abstract" individual as the focal point, to a "differentiated" public created by civil society in social life. 2 Indeed, Habermas's emphasis on this point is based on a valid justification. However, today's understanding of public is profoundly different from the one described by Habermas, who discusses the notion of the bourgeois public in the context of the history of seventeenth- eighteenth century Europe. During this period, public allowed the existence of something like publicity, which allowed different tendencies in the private realm and brought them together on common ground. In other words, it was a public where rivers from different basins joined with one another, losing their original riverbeds. Contrary to this, the idea of the public discussed in the 1990s is not a public that harmonizes with the private sphere. This is because the new understanding of the public allows the flow of diverse rivers in their own basins, with unrestricted borders. It is a public in which diverse "identities" that have taken shape over the
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Relations Vol. 4, No.1&2 Spring&Summer 2005 2 course of social history and deep social interactions continue to live on without any assimilation or destruction. Therefore, even though Habermas's stress on the differentiated dimension of the public sphere is significant, it is not enough to understand the recent transformations in this area. The most important development in the realm of the public sphere was Habermas's failure to see the advent of the dissolution of the ideological public sphere at the end of the 1980s. He failed to understand that recent political tendencies towards democratization on the eve of the 1990s, from authoritarian ideologies that attempted to control and prevent the existence of diversity, was the foretold of an "ideological" transformation, not a "structural" one. The understanding of the public sphere of the Enlightenment period described by Habermas was conceptualized around the "homogenous" and "abstract" individual. It is known that the individual of the public sphere in this period was the Western "white man." Outside of this element, which was placed at the center of the public realm, there were a variety of other
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/01/2012 for the course BIOL 227 taught by Professor Koob during the Fall '11 term at Boise State.

Page1 / 30


This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online