Habermas idea of what is a public sphere stresses that is a space where some specific citizens of a community reflect about common interest or public concerns. This state’s information is accessible to the society, so they have the chance to critic by the pubic opinion. According to this author there exist four main characteristics of an ideal public sphere: 1. There exist a bracket in this spaces where everyone is equal; 2. Its better to have just one public sphere that multiple for promoting democracy; 3. The discourse in public spheres is always about the common goods and 4. That a good democracy policy requires a separation between the civil society and state. However, we could see that these characteristics are not carry out in the practice. Habermas public sphere is a space of exclusion, power for just a few, person (mostly white men) that take the decision and create societies realities. As a result those groups that were exclude create their own counter public sphere, spaces where they share some characteristics like their gender, ethnic, sexual orientation. This counter public spheres create by those minority groups let them create their own reality and memories, and allowed the to be a apart of the public.

 

I think that if we want to create a counter public spheres to analyze and debate about current issues in our society its necessary to put into practice (or even try) Habermas 4 characteristics; at looking others as equals, appreciating and respecting their stories, believes an the way social groups see reality. We need to understand that the way of seeing Colombian’s conflict depends on the group because as we are different one an other, we experiences that conflict in different ways, depending in which context did we born, how we were raised, etc.