[tomelders]

I don't think it's unfair to impose these rules on developing nations. We have to learn from our mistakes. The industrial revolution may be the only template we have for a developed nation, but there are other routes. I can imagine a world where comparable levels of investment in Education can deliver deliver on the promises of industrialisation without as many of the "bad bits".

[arrrg]

Yeah, exactly! The poor have to learn from our mistakes and pay for them! How very, very fair.

[tomelders]

I see your point, but I don't think the fairness you want is really fair. I have to ask the question; fair for who?

Firstly, the world didn't forge ahead with the industrial revolution in spite of the environmental costs. No one was initially aware of those costs. Now we are, and there's a push for everyone to change their tactics. I think it's fair that everyone has to change, but I acknowledge that it's a bit unfair that the west got to profit on those mistakes. But that's just life.

Developing nations now have real solid data on the environmental damage an industrial revolution will inflict not only on their part of the world, but the world as a whole. Is it fair to ask them to factor that new knowledge into their plans? Maybe it's not exactly fair, but it's a reasonable request I think.

But then what about a child born today? Is it fair for that child to grow up in a world where the air they will breath becomes more dangerous with each passing second, even though the adults of today know what they are doing and have it in their power to not do it? I think that's unfair.

And it's not like China's industrialisation has helped all Chinese. It's helped a few people. Is it fair that all citizens of Shanghai should suffer the health effects of the pollution generated as a result of 1 persons endeavour to maximise a profit? I don't see it.

This is not to say it's a black and white issue. Someone somewhere has to get a rough deal. This sadly is the world we've created for ourselves, and the rules we've decided to live by. It's not fair.

[arrrg]

I don’t want anyone to damage the environment. But we got an unfair advantage and now denying that advantage to others is blatantly unfair without any kind of compensation. We have to pay others. That’s my view on this.

[dredmorbius]

You're confounding two separate issues.

One is preserving the environment, often (global warming, ocean acidification, mercury pollution, acid rain, background radiation elevation, plastics pollution, ozone depletion, antibiotics overuse) in ways which affect the global environment and pose existential risks to all of modern civilization, if not humanity.

The other is equity and fairness.

Achieving a few years or decades of growth to lose it all really doesn't strike me as particularly rational behavior.

Addressing the whole scope of challenges facing the world is going to be exceptionally difficult.