Well, now that you have signaled your virtue, Pete, perhaps this might be a good time to to move our discussion to some practical considerations of exactly how we can go about making the world into the kind of egalitarian, environmentally sustainable place warmism dogmas say are are absolutely essential to maintain human life on spaceship earth.
I'm not going to enumerate the kinds of world-wide scale structural changes that have been widely discussed by the various international, national, and local governmental entities---all of whom are seeking power over the rest of us---because I'm pretty sure everyone reading and participating in this thread is well aware of what's being proposed. And if you aren't, you should be. If, however, for the sake of discussion we accept the do-or-die climate predictions, then the governmental planners are right: all earth societies both modern and traditional, are going to have to undergo radical restructuring if we are to even approach "sustainability".
Typically, most warmist discussions don't go very far beyond stressing the pressing need for "racial restructuring" but, reading between the lines, it's pretty clear that the only way to remake the planet into a place that's safe for our grandkids to establish some kind of police state to enforce environmental rules. Although done with the highest of intentions, it's still tyranny.
The reason for this is obvious: a substantial portion of the world's population, if not most, are simply not going to willingly alter their lifestyles to the degree warmist dogmas will demand.
Here in America, for instance, the problem of governance is particularly acute since, thanks to our 2nd. Amendment---which was rather conspicuously written as a way of allowing te citizenry to resist tyranny---the creation of a climate-saving police state might well prove difficult in a society were there are actually more weapons than there are people. And, honestly, I think the US is just the tip of the iceberg (pun intended). Just looking at what is happening right now in Hong Kong, I think we have a pretty graphic demonstration of just how people around the world value freedom and liberty. Those people on the streets there waiving the American flag are doing so on purpose.
So here's my point (and I'm directing this question to all of the participants on this thread). Let's dispense with the climate is/is not warming happy talk for a bit and get serious.
Although it would be wonderful if people willingly sacrificed for the greater good, that is highly unlikely. Therefore, some form of l tyranny is going to be necessary to save the planet. In order for that to happen, to make the world sustainable---in order to have a world for our grandchildren, halt the rise of sea-levels, halt the spread of deserts, make sure that our growing populations have enough food, etc., etc. . . . are you willing to support the kind of totalitarian police state societies that will be necessary to make all this happen?
Call me a revanchist-Luddite if you want but I tend to be very self-interested about personal freedom. The kind of liberty and freedom I enjoy in America came at a high cost and is much more important to me than someone else's sense of safety. I'm sorry, but it just is.
I agree re Hong Kong, but the difference there is it is not affecting the whole population, just those that are stuck in Hong Kong.
You must remember I don't agree at all with your second amendment, even if I was American I wouldn't. It is 100% pushed still because somebody at the top of the NRA/gun makers/etc. are making a fortune. It has nothing to do with resisting tyranny. Sure it might have, but that ship sailed hundreds of years ago. It's money, money, money ... heck, from where I sit, all decisions in America are made around money.
I think the absolute worst thing that has ever happened to our population is guns. I will never own one, and I have only ever touched one because a friend of mine wanted to show me it (he had joined some military thing), and because he was a very good friend I showed 5 minutes of pretend interest, and that was that. As he was such a good friend, he also never bought them up again. Miss him.
Also I live in a country where we vote and most of us believe that our government is doing what we asked them to do. If we don't, we change the way we vote. Climate change will/has affected our election results. Then will come laws (not fast enough over here because NZ lives under the lie that we are green ... ), and so on. You live in such a country too, and tomorrow if Trump was to change his mind or be removed in 2020 (?), then the voted in party might believe in your environment more than profits ... but yes I am aware that there are a % of American's that don't believe in climate change. There is a % of the same in NZ, but I suspect a smaller %'age, but again as we don't live as green as our advertisements say, things take a long time (we are years behind Europe for example, unfortunately).
Lastly; personal freedom sailed as soon as computer speed and data storing abilities improved enough. I can assure you that those that want to know about you, know everything they need ... it is not coming, it is already here. Our governments let us believe we are free ... You try purchasing some uranium for example; won't take long and you will have a knock on your front door.
Another example re personal freedom: Before I can drive my 1750GTV again on New Zealand roads, it will need to be registered. To be registered the bare metal shell will have to be inspected by some engineer to ensure the quality of my work is up to standard. This came around because of a string of fatal accidents where poorly repaired cars just feel to pieces. There is no other way I can get this car on to NZ roads, none!