Who do you mean "we"? Look at the evolution of CO2 emisions in the past 40 years by region.
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co-emissions-by-re...
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/annual-co-emissions-by-re...
Wonderful, the United States uses more per capita than anyone else. That doesn’t mean anything in terms of total warming. Even if we cut to zero we still continue.
With twice as many people (acting similarly) you have twice the emissions, it's as simple as that.
To reduce emissions, you need everyone doing their part. And it is also obviously easier and more effective to tackle high-emitters first (because incentivizing a single US family to have their second car be a bit smaller and electric is obviously less burdensome than banning 3 Indian families from heating their homes in winter...)
Also, a bit portion of China's excessive growth in emissions is a byproduct of manufacturing shit for US consumers.
Why should the US be entitled to pollute the world while everyone else has to live without any confort?
Per capita, china murders 0.15 persons per 10k people, ~1.4billion people.
Who murders more people?
What's your problem with the "we" word, again?
Region X was first and reduced their emissions 10-20% so it's fine and it's region Y that's the problem, or
Region X is fine because they have less people, region Y should reduce even though they already have a fraction of per-capita emissions
Both seem like pretty shitty arguments
Things are manufactured because there are people buying.
I vote it's the manufacturing. What you just said was "China et. al. are not culpable for horrible environmental practices, the people on the other side of the world are because they buy dogshit products"
I can say with 100% certainty that china can manufacture dogshit products in an environmentally friendly way... which would drive the cost up and people would in fact not buy them.
You're blaming the wrong entity here.