Loka Over the Years
"This was a forum on telecommunications and the future of democracy . . . . As a homeless person, no other technology gives me a voice."
"There were no fist fights, no name calling, no partisan politics. If national governments could do this, there would be world peace."
Participant in first U.S. Citizens’ Panel (on telecommunications policy), April 1997
“U.S. genetic testing policies will improve when decision makers learn that -- along with research administrators, Nobel laureates and CEOs -- the average citizen must be heard, too…What Thomas Jefferson called "cherished liberty" is not determined by our genes. It is determined by our eternal vigilance.”
Phil Bereano & Richard Sclove, “Life, Liberty and Genetic Testing”, March 1998
“…there are far better ways of responding to 9/11 than the kinds of knee-jerk militarism, Orwellian surveillance and preemptive strikes on human rights that our leaders currently prefer…The construction of more peaceful, resilient systems can be accomplished through imaginative efforts (many of them well underway) aimed at living lightly on the earth with justice and compassion.”
Langdon Winner, “Complexity, Trust and Terror”, December 2002
“Social change movements, like ‘truth’, go through three stages---first they are denied, then they are resisted, and then they are accepted as self evident. They are the place where arts, activism, people and democracy intersect.”
Marcy Mistrett, CRN participant, Oct. 2003
“Langdon Winner…is the one who in his testimony brought up the idea that Congress should include in the legislation some provision in which small panels of ordinary, disinterested citizens, people who didn’t have a financial stake in whether nano succeeded or not, could get together and talk about important societal issues and examine some of those in more detail. And [some of] the members of Congress, who get elected by ordinary citizens, thought ‘hmm, sounds like that might be a good idea.’”
Eric Werwa, Office of Congressman Mike Honda, September 2004
“Proponents of a nanotech revolution predict it will cause dramatic and sweeping changes globally in every aspect of human life. That makes the general public of every nation, their children, and their children’s children the key stakeholders in this potential revolution. Accordingly, the general public everywhere must be continually informed, and a range of deliberative processes must empower them to be heard and heeded in major local, national, and international decisions about how – and whether – to design and use nanotechnologies.”
Loka Nanotechnology Group, “Precaution, Participation and Nanotechnology”, August 2007
pTA emphasizes that everyone lives with the positive and negative consequences of science and technology … ordinary citizens should have a role in shaping legislation in the technological arena as they do in others, and pTA advocates argue that they can and should play a role in technology assessment.
Rick Worthington et al,
Technology Assessment and Public Participation: From TA to pTA, December, 2012