Kamusal alanın dönüşümü ve Türk sembolik modernleşmesi
Özet
SUMMARY İn this paper, inspring from Habermas's critical readings, I adopted the supposition that transformation of public sphere is not the demise of public sphere as Habermas claims, but it means widening of public sphere's spacial and discourse borders. I claimed that together with inner problems of Habermas's idealisation of bourgeois public sphere, some factors which I expressed under the headings of technological developments and globalisation processes necessitates public sphere's reconceptualization. Starting out from this developments, I talked about transformed public sphere's possibility of embrace the public demands which pushed into private. However, I claimed that, on the one hand, technological developments make possible integration and differentiation synchroncaly; on the other hand, globalisation processes allow various articulations between Universal/universal and Local/local and depending upon these I emphasized that there is a ambiguous potential related to public sphere. And so, I expressed that domination of democratic hegemony which take into account others demands, in the public sphere depends upon results of social struggles. İn third chapter of study, I try to understand reflections of transformation of Western public spheres on Republic's public sphere which is a part of Republic elites' modernitiy project which create a symbolic modernity. As a result, I claimed that Republic elites' modernity project created a modern mentality which is very sensitive to symbols and this makes public sphere non-interactive arena in which superficial symbolic struggles take place instead of inteactive and dialogical struggles. 167