A public participation project, in which the boundaries of the political debate were discussed. Hoping to define a respectable “clean” political discourse and formulate a treaty reflecting the public’s expectations of what constitutes a legitimate discourse based on political ideology or clear up when there is a misuse of a public position.
The project was made up of an ice-cream truck, driving around Israel periphery, inviting the public to participate in 4 interactive games asking question about the dilemmas in a political discourse. Ones the participant answered the question each one got a popsicle. The data was then used to formulate the treaty for a “clean” political discourse and handed out for Same Candidates and elected officials to sign.
01: In what case is it ok to use “bad” language during an argument? Throw a ball
Magenta – No problem its just talk
Orange – When the argument is getting heated
White- Only when I am offended
Blue – Never
02: What does a politician using “bad” language make you feel? Spin a cube
Magenta – Wanting to do something about it
Orange – Terrible but there is nothing to do
Blue – I find it convincing
03: When can a leader be dishonest? Insert a disk
Magenta – When important goals need to be reached, everything is allowed
Orange – One can’t succeed without being dishonest
White- There is no choice when everyone else is dishonest
Blue – Never, leaders must always be honest
04: Can we “clean” the political discourse?
Yes / No
Vote with your popsicle stick