Going to reverse that...we have A responsibility, but a smaller one. Whatever China and India do, it will move the needle for the entire world, in comparison our efforts no matter how large cannot, we have zero emissions responsibility other than what we decide to take and that's the problem. Too many people here are hyper-focused on equity, guilt, and virtue-signaling so they won't permit selfishness even when there's no consequences for it.

Our small population is our strength that counterbalances our emissions, a population is a metric that cannot be manipulated to be lower (ethically), so places like China and India are stuck with theirs and that's a huge disadvantage with environmental policy. You take issue with us having an advantage they do not, there's your inequity.

The planet can afford us to have our current emissions in perpetuity if necessary. Other countries will have their own reasons to bring down emissions, and because there's no binding agreements, that's all we can rely on. There's no reason to act like our actions are the first domino that will cause the rest of the planet to fall in line accordingly. They're going to continue at their own pace in accordance with the economic viability and demand for greener technology. There's your virtue-signaling.

This is a global problem that will require global solutions. Blaming China and India for problems the west caused is not useful.

There's your guilt. It's a global problem, that developing countries knowingly will add to, and if given the chance would do the same if not more damage, but it's also "the west" at fault because we did it first. Developing countries have declared their intentions, just because they haven't had a century to do as much damage as us doesn't mean you ignore them. As I said, their actions play the biggest role in the fate of everyone, you actually can't afford to downplay, let alone ignore them.