That people of means could assist those who do not, does not at all imply that people of means who say they are assisting are actually assisting. The road to hell and involuntary collectivism is paved with good intentions.
The aversion to authoritarianism of any flavor is well grounded and we cannot cross that line, so your point on forced collectivism is valid. But when the current system is trying to burn 300 million years of fossil fuels in a cool 300 years without having a ramp towards a sustainable future during a period of wealth inequality greater than the gilded age, _something's going to give_. It's either going to be our economic system, our mechanism for ordering society, or 3C+ of warming.
There are many ways our economic system is entirely compatible with stopping global warming, but it would require putting prices on things people consider sacrosanct like unlimited driving and unlimited municipally treated water for lawns. Wake me when the socialists are willing to talk how they will equitably tell citizens that they can’t do environmentally destructive things when the citizens are telling them that they want to do those environmentally destructive things. I’m not saying there’s an easy answer, in fact, I’m convinced that there isn’t. He had every day we are told that if only we have a revolution, suddenly these hard problems just disappear, and I don’t think that’s true. After the revolution, people will still be selfish. Perhaps the selfishness won’t be measured in dollars, but it will still exist.