Sustainability

Nature has never needed man in order to sustain itself. It has coexisted with every species for millions of years, without any of them having had to theorise its own balance. Man is the only one who has had to learn, late, to stop destroying that on which he depends.

Some thresholds are already crossed. Coral reefs are dying at a pace that no effort can reverse. Entire polar ices may have tipped toward a melt that can no longer be stopped. To pretend that it would be enough to act for everything to become as it was would be a lie, and Forgr does not lie about what is already lost.

An honest question then remains, one that many no longer dare to ask aloud: what is the use of acting, if a part of the disaster is already written?

Blaise Pascal, to justify believing in a God whose existence he could not prove, set out a simple reasoning: compare the consequences of each choice, in each possible scenario. The same reasoning applies here, without any need to decide whether everything is still reversible. If there is still time to act and we act, we limit the disaster. If there is still time and we do not act, we lose that possibility by the mere fact of having remained silent. If it is already too late and we act anyway, we will, at the very least, have lessened what could have been worse. If it is already too late and we do not act, we then suffer the worst scenario, without even having tried to diminish it. In none of these four cases does inaction prevail over action.

This domain welcomes every project carried by that conviction: that the question of whether it is too late has never been the right question to ask before acting.