“The contemporary public sphere is characterized according to Habermas by the weathering of its critical roles and capacities. In the past publicity was used to subject people or the present political decisions to the public. Today the public sphere is recruited for the use of hidden policies by interest groups. For Habermas, the principles of the public sphere are weakening in the 20th century. The public is no longer made out of masses of individuals but of organized people that institutionally exerting their influence on the public sphere and debate.”  אניhttp://culturalstudiesnow.blogspot.com/2011/09/jurgen-habermass-public-sphere.html
As I was reading up on the subject of public sphere, these questions came to mind: If counter publics are necessary in recognizing that public spheres can be hegemonic, how can we make metaspaces so that discourse can occur while recognizing this imbalance in power? How do we understand the role of children, especially those who don’t participate as the silent or silenced in the rhetorical public sphere?

In thinking more about the large area I could be covering with my research, I realized that what interests me most are what I have been calling the structures, systems, and spaces of participatory governance with children. Although the processes and intergroup dynamics of children’s participation in governance is interesting, I don’t think this is where I would like to delve into. I am interested in the organs, groups, and networks that operate in the public and counter publics, to examine how these connections can promote action for community change so as to affect the lived realities of children. Perhaps this is very preliminary for me to say before I jump more into my literature, but I felt the need to articulate my perspective at the moment, to think through how I would prioritize my area of study over the many aspects that could potentially go into research on the topic of participatory democratic governance with children.