During recent years, Turkey has been through a lot of drastic changes that effected urban context and limited people’s visibility and participation in public. The privatization processes intersect with urban restrictions by the decision-makers. Since the usage of public space has a different meaning in Turkish culture; such as sitting outside is a very rooted act, the notion of public participation is cultural. However, recent transformations in the urban sphere negatively affected this publicity, but people are still eager to reflect their reactions in different mediums. That’s why, the best way of finding out the ways of solidarity would be looking back into the culture and traditions we have in our daily life, social, economical and political relationships, to trigger a familiar point of view in future attempts.    

As a designer, my practical purpose is to search new methodologies of easing ways for discussions in public space; which I intend to inspect the right to the city in a broader context. I believe that the spaces of discussion play a big role in the discussion process. When we think about the parliaments, theatres, churches, or classrooms, we automatically find ourselves on pre-decided hierarchical positions. These places are choosing who can involve, in which amount. At this point, to create fully equal, democratic, and agonistic places, we need to turn back to our cultural background to find out the most natural environment, where exchanging and sharing information was already happening.

At this point, we should start splitting European public space, by looking at it in the frame of countries, cities, neighbourhoods, or even streets. Each country has its own usage of public space in terms of geographical, climatic, political, or economic characteristics, that became the culture over time. By looking at the habits, rituals, routines of everyday life, we would be able to find out the best way of equal participation and solidarity.