Exactly, at this stage the panic inducing "OMG we're all going to die/out children will live in MadMax world for sure" mental state should be added to the long

Exactly, at this stage the panic inducing "OMG we're all going to die/out children will live in MadMax world for sure" mental state should be added to the long list of dangers caused by the climate around the climate change. Right after the danger of knee-jerk deindustrialisation of the West and collapse of democracies in favor of autocracies. These countries (like China) not only double their greenhouse emissions for each tonne we limit, they also actively promote fear and panic amongst our populations that leads to the very deindustrialisation that will form the basis of their power over us. However, I remain optimistic, yes there is climate change, yes it will have a range of effects on people depending on where they live. From the lengthening of the growing season and all the positive outcomes, through minor inconvenience, to crop failures/lack of water and death of the others. Sadly, some of the poorest regions on the planet will be hit the worst and some of the most wealthy will reap the benefits. Without actual physical power over countries like China there is no stopping of climate change. The best we(democracies) can do is to retain as much power as possible to help as many people as possible during this time. Imagine scenario 1 where a climate change is slowed down by 1C over next 20 years at the cost of entire deindustrialisation of Europe, and it's subsequent subjugation to Russian-Chinese partnership. Then scenario 2 where we have 1C of extra warming now not in 20 years, but Europe remains free, wealthy and able to continue to help poorer countries, accept refugees etc. Which world is going to be a better one? I think people will choose option 2.