> we can turn rich countries into poor countries by taking away transport
City and economy planning, work from home, basic income, degrowth ...
> energy
Renewable energy, insulation and heat pumps, not air-conditioners.
> protein from the working class
That's propaganda, and now you're getting somewhere. We already get 63% of our protein from plants. If we were to extend that to 100%, we could store our entire 1.5C carbon budget through afforesting and rewilding pastures, which would also help restore biodiversity.
Climate change, resource depletion, deforestation, loss of biodiversity, pollution, overpopulation, soil erosion, and overfishing are all but symptoms of ecological overshoot.
Switching off animal protein would help solve climate change (15-25% impact, co2/methane/n20), deforestation, pollution, soil erosion and overfishing.
So it's one of the most impactful things we should do ... helping to solve 5 things out of 7.
> But that approach also destroys most of the hope for technological solutions.
We don't have any such solutions, that's something that sways the attention from things we already have at our disposal (just wait for this one thing that may or may not come ...).
> And even if the richest countries did sacrifice everything
Rich countries did/are doing most of the damage, the poorest ones are the ones paying most for it. If everyone would act as we do, we would need several more earths.
> if many other countries continued pursuing growth of economies, consumption, and population
Should they stay underdeveloped, or die out just so we could still be living like pigs in clover ?