Everyone who talks about China’s “horrible” emissions always avoids referencing cumulative, per capita, or, even worse, cumulative per capita numbers because they really interfere with the desired narrative.
If you want to cook it because it's otherwise unfair to China, fine, it's your funeral too.
Do you understand that everyone around the world remembers how western countries pioneered globalization and pushed all the nasty production to third-world countries, so that they don't get their white hand dirty?
You don't get to greenwash yourselves just because stuff you consume gets produced somewhere else, got it?
But hey, I have an idea! If you insist on being no less virtuous then Mother Teresa, how about this proposal: we shut down all of the outsourced production for US and Europe. Just think of it, this would be a huge optimization: it's the smallest part of the world that consumes the most.
And people there are clearly eager to be heroes and show us how to take care of climate - let's help them finally put their money where their mouth is. It's a win-win!
Are you hearing voices? Stop assuming dichotomy and making up stuff every time someone criticizes you on practical specific things.
> western countries
> globalization
> all the nasty production
> third-world countries
> white hand
> greenwash
> stuff
> somewhere else
Practical of specific is which one of those? Your words, not mine.
It's not perfect, every situation is a bit different, but China is such a dirty outlier compared with other major economies and the world that you can't handwave it away - https://www.iea.org/data-and-statistics/charts/co2-emissions...
Producing something in China versus most other places means emitting more carbon.
But it doesn’t matter regardless because any attempt to impose authoritarian climate measures on China will send the West into economic crisis, one way or another.
China looks terrible compared to almost all other significant economies. When fundamentals like electricity production are much dirtier, you don't need to look much further downstream.
> But it doesn’t matter regardless
What "doesn't matter"?
> because any attempt to impose authoritarian climate measures on China will send the West into economic crisis, one way or another.
International terms of trade can not be "authoritarian", by definition. That's an ironic misunderstanding: if you want authoritarian look no further than the communist dictatorship ruling the country.