The relationship between public space and democracy is crucial. Democracy requires places where citizens can gather together to discuss the issues of the day and work on solving problems. In the past, architects recognized this and built public squares where citizens could assemble. During antiquity, public activity focused on the agora-a place created for both the market and political assembly. Throughout U.S. history, planners created town commons, central greens, and public squares to facilitate civic interaction. Public space was intended to galvanize democratic activities-especially the informal meetings that could produce discussion and deliberation.This space also facilitated the potential gathering of strangers. Only in public can citizens meet and talk with fellow members of society they do not associate with in the realms of work and family life (the two other central places in most people' s lives). As Ray Oldenburg puts it, public spaces "counter the tendency to be restrictive in the enjoyment of others by being open to all and by laying emphasis on qualities not confined to status distinctions current in the society."1 In public, citizens learn to deal with strangers who are different from them (this is especially true in urban parks).
An examination of some current, innovative democratic
practices casts doubt on the possibility of democratic renewal, especially
in the face of the many obstacles presented by contemporary U.S. culture.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.