AN OPEN LETTER TO HUMANITY

We are sawing off the branch we are sitting on — and instead of facing it, we keep looking the other way.

Until just a few decades ago, humanity's mistakes tended to have local or limited consequences. That changed after the Second World War. First came nuclear weapons. Then came unchecked development and the relentless consumption of the planet's resources. More recently, technological advances have given us artificial intelligence — a technology with extraordinary potential, but one that can also be misused in ways that could have extreme consequences for humanity.

I am talking about global threats: climate change, the risk of nuclear conflict, the malicious use of artificial intelligence, and the loss of biodiversity. These challenges are interconnected. They do not respect national borders, and they demand determined, urgent action at a global level.

In the space of just 80 years:

• we have altered the Earth's climate;
• we have created weapons capable, if used on a massive scale, of devastating life on Earth;
• we have developed technologies such as artificial intelligence that offer extraordinary opportunities, but could also pose enormous risks if deliberately misused or allowed to develop beyond our control;
• we are steadily impoverishing the world's ecosystems and biodiversity.

For half a century, scientists and thinkers around the world have been warning us that we cannot continue down this path. Yet governments and political leaders carry on largely as before, too often focused on national interests, short-term economic gain and the few years separating one election from the next.

The results are plain to see: countless conferences and declarations, but far too little action, while the dangers continue to grow.

So, what can we do?

Consider how we already organise society. Local problems are dealt with by local authorities. National problems are dealt with by national governments.

But who deals with global problems?

There is still no global authority capable of making decisions in the interests of humanity as a whole — and with the power to enforce those decisions and impose sanctions when necessary.

The United Nations has not been able to fulfil this role, and its veto system prevents it from doing so. In any case, the UN was designed for the world that emerged from the Second World War. Even reforming it would be extraordinarily difficult.

Perhaps we need to think beyond reform.

One possible solution would be a World Council, made up of representatives from different countries alongside experts from relevant fields. Its authority would be strictly limited to genuinely global issues. It would be transparently funded, subject to rigorous oversight, and equipped with real decision-making and enforcement powers.

But who could create such a body? The world's 193 states? They have not done so until now, and there is little reason to believe they will do so on their own.

The pressure must therefore come from below: from a new global awareness and an international movement large enough to influence the politics of individual nations.

And before such a movement can exist, people need to understand what is at stake. That means using every means available to us — the media, social networks and schools.

I am trying to contribute to that effort. I have created the No-Extinction project, with this website bringing together information and proposals, a Manifesto, practical guides for today and for the future, a global petition and an educational game.

I have also written the book “The Century of Choices: Facing the Great Challenges of Our Future Together”, available in print and digital editions on Amazon.

Both the website and the book are available in English as well as Italian, and translations into other major languages could follow if the initiative gains wider support.

But there is a fundamental problem: people are not being properly informed. The media tend to report the consequences of these crises far more often than their underlying causes and the possible solutions. And no initiative of this kind can achieve anything if it remains the project of a single individual.

We can — and should — debate how to build something better. What we can no longer afford to debate is whether we need to act.

So, I am asking people of goodwill everywhere — women and men alike — to help spread this idea.

• To the media: publish it, examine it, challenge it.
• To political leaders: discuss it.
• To everyone: learn about these issues, become aware of what is at stake and contribute in whatever way you can. It may be as simple as signing the global petition, sharing the initiative on social media or talking about it with your family and friends. One drop may achieve very little — but millions of drops can wear away stone.
• To scientists, experts and intellectuals: support the No-Extinction project.
• To organisations and associations: come together while preserving your independence, creating a shared space that could become a Global Alliance for a Common Future.

If we simply stand by and watch, these problems will not solve themselves. They will grow worse — until one day events may move beyond our ability to control them.

Think of our children, our grandchildren and the generations that will follow them.

What kind of world do we want to leave them?

My thanks to everyone willing to help.

And thank you for reading.