Operating in the interests of financial markets and large multinationals, public institutions that manage billions of euros now decide the fates of territories and of millions of people. This is an
abuse of power that favors only a few to the detriment of community and society as a whole. For this reason, the current hand-in-glove relationship between state agencies and large private entities must be denounced and broken up, with the aim of placing the interest of the common good above all else.

The fossil fuel industry is responsible for social inequality, forced migration and the worsening of the health of the environment and people. Big finance is the pivot on which the economy of fossil fuels revolves: a centralized economy, violent, managed by a few and closely linked to state security services, intertwined with public finance and its use strongly characterized and conditioned by the geopolitical context. The resources available to states and private entities are used in a very harmful way, while they could be the starting point to dismantle the fossil fuel economy and undertake the much desired transition.

Extractivism is based on the systematic removal of resources from territories, in the broadest sense of the term. One example is the water that a multinational takes, but also the impact that a large infrastructure such as a gas pipeline can have on the territory it occupies. It is a theft that is combined with the forced displacement of sovereignty over those same territories from those who live there to those who plunder them. Those who “decide” are no longer those whose survival relies on what those territories make available to them: instead the decision makers are those who use their political and economic control to ensure the consolidation and reproducibility
of a predatory model. For us, this model must be rejected in its entirety.

One of the responses to the crisis of global economic growth that has been going on for years is the creation of mega-infrastructural corridors around the planet. The aim is to redesign global
geography to allow just-in-time production, accelerate the exchange of consumer goods and increase profit margins. Pharaohic projects, such as the New Silk Road, are bringing environmental
devastation, accelerating climate collapse, exacerbating exploitation in the name of progress, and spawning further pandemics and economic and social crises.

The list is long: corruption, connivance and links with organised crime, tax evasion and increasingly sophisticated forms of tax avoidance, money laundering and a wide range of abuses of power.
These are all forms of malfeasance that are reported on a daily basis by media and have a very strong common thread: the impunity, with very few exceptions, enjoyed by public and private actors in their fraudulent operations. It is precisely this profound interweaving between public and private that most ‘deserves’ to be revealed and told.

The topic of ecological transition is now subject to wide public debate. However, questions must be asked: is an ecological transition that is only energy-based possible? Do we really believe that those who created the climate crisis should be at the table promoting the transition? We believe that the only acceptable transition is one that is democratic, fair, equitable and sustainable: it must question the centralization of political and economic power and energy production. We believe that the only possible transition must pass through a change in the energy and production model, in which communities and territories can have their say. We need a radical transformation of society, starting from the bottom and the territories, from the definition of real needs and not based on projections shaped by the same multinationals that now control the energy market and other markets.

Rapidly unfolding climate change is now a reality that brings with it environmental, social and economic devastation, especially for the most marginalized communities. The commitments of governments and multinationals have so far failed to contain global warming below the safety threshold long established by the scientific community. False technological solutions are being proposed that postpone the problem or fail to address it: emission offsetting mechanisms, which
condemn those who suffer most from the climate crisis to sacrifice their territories to allow polluters to continue their activities undisturbed, are just one example. It is profoundly unfair that once again those who generated the crisis come out stronger without changing their harmful model of development and without paying the bill for the wounds inflicted on the planet.