The paper by Paul Slovic explores the interplay between risk perception, trust, and democracy, highlighting the increasing politicization and contentious nature of risk management. Despite societal improvements in health and safety, the public's concern about risks has grown, leading to polarized views and conflicts. These conflicts are not due to public ignorance or irrationality but are a result of the complex dynamics of participatory democracy, exacerbated by technological and social changes that erode trust. Slovic emphasizes the crucial role of trust in risk management, noting that trust is fragile and easily destroyed. He argues that trust is more fundamental to conflict resolution than risk communication, which often fails to bridge the gap between technical risk assessments and public perceptions. The paper discusses how negative events, such as accidents or mismanagement, are more visible and impactful on trust compared to positive events. Additionally, sources of bad news are perceived as more credible, and distrust tends to reinforce itself, further complicating trust-building efforts. The author suggests that the challenges of risk management are not unique to any particular system but are inherent in the adversarial nature of democratic systems. He proposes that restoring trust may require significant levels of public involvement and power sharing, which has rarely been attempted. Despite the complexity and challenges, Slovic remains optimistic about improving risk management processes by understanding the root causes of social conflict and the forces that shape risk management outcomes.The paper by Paul Slovic explores the interplay between risk perception, trust, and democracy, highlighting the increasing politicization and contentious nature of risk management. Despite societal improvements in health and safety, the public's concern about risks has grown, leading to polarized views and conflicts. These conflicts are not due to public ignorance or irrationality but are a result of the complex dynamics of participatory democracy, exacerbated by technological and social changes that erode trust. Slovic emphasizes the crucial role of trust in risk management, noting that trust is fragile and easily destroyed. He argues that trust is more fundamental to conflict resolution than risk communication, which often fails to bridge the gap between technical risk assessments and public perceptions. The paper discusses how negative events, such as accidents or mismanagement, are more visible and impactful on trust compared to positive events. Additionally, sources of bad news are perceived as more credible, and distrust tends to reinforce itself, further complicating trust-building efforts. The author suggests that the challenges of risk management are not unique to any particular system but are inherent in the adversarial nature of democratic systems. He proposes that restoring trust may require significant levels of public involvement and power sharing, which has rarely been attempted. Despite the complexity and challenges, Slovic remains optimistic about improving risk management processes by understanding the root causes of social conflict and the forces that shape risk management outcomes.