The term globalization is recently taken as a key concept in numerous disciplines because of its complex structure formed by its economic, political and socio-cultural dimensions. Also in urban studies it is inevitable to undertake it as a key concept which embraces many dialectics such as ‘heterogeneity – homogeneity’, ‘change – stability’, ‘locality – universality’, ‘individuality – community’, ‘identity – difference’. Contemporary cities transformed by the impacts of globalization make apparent and reproduce the dialectics and the conflicts of globalization by structuring and producing both urban lifestyles and urban space. In this context, the concept of city can be defined as a place in perpetual motion and continual transformation with its instable and new meanings. The public space of the city, as an interface of social and spatial reproduction, is characterized by the dialectics of globalization and getting involved in this perpetual motion as a field of struggle beyond conflicts.

Social and spatial organizations produced by urban public spaces define the urban public life. As Habermas states, Although Habermas refers to an intangible ‘public sphere’ rather than a tangible ‘urban space’, the worldwide uprising urban social movements indicate that the physical public space and the public sphere cannot be considered separately and they illustrate that the physical public space is the condition of effective public life. These urban social movements bring into account the political significance and the potential of public space for producing new modes of social and spatial practices. Thus, a re-investigation of public space within its multidimensional faces becomes necessary.

Within the cross section of ‘public space’, the aim of the paper is to reveal the impacts of global dynamics on the urban space; to investigate the possibility and sustainability of the public space as a new mode of social and spatial reproduction; and to discuss the role of architecture within this framework.

The paper provides a theoretical and conceptual underpinning of social and cultural dialectics which are played out in the urban public space and a critical review of its philosophical and political background. Within this framework, the interrelations of the public space, society and architecture that are underlined by occupy movements will be illustrated on the case of ‘Occupy Gezi Park’ movement which was raised on May – June 2013 in Istanbul.

Finally future implications on the relationship between the society, public space and architecture are opened to discussion: What are the new potentials and developments, including spatial and social practices, provided by the experiment of ‘Occupy Gezi Park’? What impact would a new understanding of ‘public space’ and ‘public life’ has on the future of cities? What is the role of architecture in influencing these new tendencies and creating a new spatial experience among the city and the citizen? How can architecture accommodate and represent a new public life? Is another public space possible?