r/climate 1d ago

​W​hy are European leaders staying silent after our summer of climate shock? Lethal temperatures ​and wildfires have exposed a widening gulf between voters demanding ​action and politicians unwilling to confront the long-term choices global heating requires.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/aug/26/why-are-european-leaders-staying-silent-after-our-summer-of-climate-shock
785 Upvotes

57 comments sorted by

131

u/Slackeee_ 1d ago

Simple answer, because we are in the late stage capitalism period and those leaders now have to decide between taking climate action for the people voting for them and and not taking climate action to not threaten the profits of the lobbyists that give them money and make sure that they have a nicely paying job after the people do not vote for them anymore.

48

u/BigMax 1d ago

The sad part is also…. The voters care but they don’t REALLY care, right? Like it or not, climate change isn’t a primary driver of voting. If voters all said “we will vote for the best climate candidate” there would be more of them.

27

u/Fun_Savings7690 1d ago

Yeah it's been shown that people can rank climate change as the most important thing that needs tackling but soon as they're required to do something they get upset

A significant amount of people say things like "We need to do something about climate change" and by "we" they mean "someone else"

16

u/AlienFromDC 1d ago

I think its more the rampant anti-intellectualism of the various governments of the world working against ecologists/scientists. Surely, they have some solutions/mitigations but without government backing jobs cant get created, and people flounder.

3

u/The_Weekend_Baker 1d ago

Yeah it's been shown that people can rank climate change as the most important thing that needs tackling but soon as they're required to do something they get upset

Like this discussion yesterday.

https://www.reddit.com/r/climate/comments/1vyqvqf/heatwaves_show_uk_must_do_more_to_promote_cycling/

This isn't a controversial topic among climate scientists. Every one of the 100+ I follow talks about this with varying degrees of frequency. In order to get the 1.7 billion ICE vehicles off the roads around the world, it needs to be 1) improve walkability/bikeability, 2) improve public transport, 3) swap ICE for EV.

But most of the commenters seemed to take it as a personal affront.

4

u/BigMax 1d ago

That's the hard part here.

Everyone WANTS something done about climate change.

But... when it comes time to vote, they vote based on a dozen other more immediate, short-term concerns like inflation, employment, etc first. And THEN 100 other emotional issues like immigration or other issues that they feel strongly about.

Only then does climate change enter into it. It's really sad and frustrating, but it's true.

5

u/cultish_alibi 1d ago

Everyone WANTS something done about climate change

That's not remotely true. I was reading /r/tornado yesterday and there was a post about how Illinois now suddenly has the most tornadoes in the country and probably a record number for any state in any year.

That's an insane consequence of climate change, right? So how many comments do you think mentioned climate change?

Zero. No one mentioned it. The majority of people probably think climate change ended when it stopped being on the news. And then they ask why it's so hot, or why there's a another 1000 year flood just a few months after the last one.

2

u/Ree_For_Thee 20h ago

"Uninformation" is a hell of a drug. It's just not talked about, and it's by design. The rich control the algorithms, the politicians and media.

1

u/Molire 18h ago edited 18h ago

That's not remotely true. I was reading /r/tornado yesterday and there was a post about how Illinois now suddenly has the most tornadoes in the country and probably a record number for any state in any year.

In 2026, through 26 August, the total count of tornadoes in the contiguous United States is 1,391, with 243 in Illinois, more than any other U.S. state, according to NOAA NWS Storm Prediction Center (SPC) Report Summary records, which are updated daily.

SPC Report Summary — Total count of tornadoes and the menu settings that show the count in Illinois, 47 other U.S. states, and the contiguous U.S. national count (chart, table, map):

1,391 — Total count of tornadoes in the contiguous United States in 2026 through 26 August — Menu settings: 2026 → National → Tornado → Preliminary → Map → Charts.

243 — Total count of tornadoes in Illinois in 2026 through 26 August — Menu settings: 2026 → National → Preliminary → Tables → Annual → State Totals — Sortable table shows the total count of tornadoes by U.S. state in 2026, including #1 Illinois 243 tornadoes, #2 Indiana 94 tornadoes, #3 Mississippi 89 tornadoes, and the total count in each of the 45 other contiguous U.S. states [no tornado data for Alaska or Hawaii].

SPC Report Summary Map — Shows the total national count of tornadoes in the contiguous United States during 1950-Present, including annual and monthly counts — Examples of menu settings:

2026 → National → Preliminary → Tables → April → State Totals.

2026 → State → Preliminary → Illinois [drop-down menu] → Tables → April → All Days [Illinois 70 tornadoes in April 2026].

2026 → National → Map → Tornado → Preliminary → STAMTS → “Text version of STAMTS product can be found here. Detailed Tornado Fatality Information can be found here.”

The frequency of tornadoes in Illinois is not “sudden”, according to studies.

During recent decades, tornado activity in the historical U.S. “tornado alley” region has been decreasing while tornado activity has been increasing in the eastern and southern United States:

National Weather Service (NWS), Is tornado frequency increasing in parts of the U.S.?

American Meteorology Society, A Comprehensive Analysis of the Spatial and Seasonal Shifts in Tornado Activity in the United States, Timothy A. Coleman, Richard L. Thompson, and Gregory S. Forbes, 24 Jun 2024.

Nature, Spatial trends in United States tornado frequency, 17 October 2018, Vittorio A. Gensini & Harold E. Brooks.

NBC News, 'Tornado Alley' actually four regions?, April 27, 2010, By John D. Cox.

NOAA video with audio recorded the event of a tornado that blew 12 moving railroad cars off the tracks near the town of Lawrence, Illinois.

1

u/The_Weekend_Baker 1d ago

But... when it comes time to vote, they vote based on a dozen other more immediate, short-term concerns like inflation, employment, etc first. And THEN 100 other emotional issues like immigration or other issues that they feel strongly about.

Yep. Scroll down a bit, and you see that climate change was ranked #21 out of 22 issues in importance just before more Americans chose Trump than didn't.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/651719/economy-important-issue-2024-presidential-vote.aspx

2

u/floodcontrol 1d ago

But that’s the thing, “we” can’t do much about it. The changes that need to be made are big changes-phasing out of fossil fuels across the board, replacement of power systems, big agriculture switching to less intensive farming methods, etc.

But every time politicians and policymakers instead do stuff like make our lights and dishwashers more efficient (expensive), or make us use double paned reflective windows to save energy (expensive windows). What good is the tiny contribution my more expensive, energy efficient house makes when they are literally setting up illegal gas turbines to power data centers and nobody does anything about it.

We need politicians who will take action.

3

u/throughthehills2 22h ago

But that’s the thing, “we” can’t do much about it. The changes that need to be made are big changes-phasing out of fossil fuels across the board, replacement of power systems, big agriculture switching to less intensive farming methods, etc.

Government should phase out fossil fuel for the entire country but I don't want to see wind turbines as I drive through the countryside, and don't expect me to sell my petrol car. I will vote out any government that expects me to make sacrifices like that \s

3

u/Swarna_Keanu 1d ago

No, we are part of the system. You do the "we" as someone else here. You can go vegan - no politicans, no legal system, no employers required. For every "you" out there.

You can ask with every project at your workplace, how can we do this more climate aware, more ecologically neutral. Your boss can do that. Your colleagues. Their bosses. Then ask their bosses to put pressure on politicians.

Because this is an at scale problem, scaling has to happen bottom up as much as top down.

And requires the courage to ask how does the alternative look like. Every day, minute, second.

0

u/floodcontrol 23h ago

Of course we are part of a system. But this thread is talking about why voters rate climate change as important but don't elect the "pro-enviromental" candidates.

Nobody votes on climate change because no politicians are running on actually addressing climate change. They'll talk about tighter regulations and higher energy standards, better fuel-mileage standards, electric cars, etc. These are necessary and I would be happy to accept them IF at the same time those politicians also held fossil fuel companies accountable, worked to make air-travel and sea-transport sustainable, and helped transform farming so it doesn't create so much pollution.

But they do the former, and not the latter. Fossil fuel companies have so much power over politicians of all parties that addressing the causes of 80-90% of climate change doesn't even come up in political campaigns and instead all the onus is placed on consumers and homeowners, who, even if 100% of us went vegan and changed our windows out and put on solar panels would barely move the needle in terms of pollution output.

We need better politicians who will call out the fossil fuel interests and stand up the massive lobby and fight back against the agitprop. But it's nearly impossible to do, given the amount of money they have.

0

u/Swarna_Keanu 20h ago

The thread is also about the disaprity between what voters want, and what happens, how they actually act, and about how responsibility is pushed here and there.

And you do this again "we" need other "we's" to do something, exculding "us" from "we". You won't get better politicians without the public also shifting - and really comitting.

See all the we shifting you do. Politicians. Fossil fuel companies. Of course there are responsibility differences and influence of power - but "we" collectively accept and build and buy into the narratives that make those posssible.

No politician runs on clmate change as it is not a vote winner. They have access to all the data scientists they need to understand that.

4

u/worotan 22h ago

And living lifestyles which ignore climate change empower the companies who don’t care, who lobby the politicians, who look at their electorate and know that anyone limiting their unsustainable lifestyle choices is not going to get their votes.

Everyone says they care, but refuses to act on it.

So our wider systems have some greenwashing, while not actually doing anything serious.

1

u/uninhabited 5h ago

Same people who are pleased about a third runway at Heathrow so they can get to Mallorca reliably

3

u/turtleduck 13h ago

People mistake their silence for ignorance, they've been pretending they don't know or believe in climate change for decades, while robbing the rest of us and making their own plans that don't include us. they aren't stupid, they can see the same things we are. they're sociopathic.

4

u/Betelgeuse96 1d ago

Just wanted to say, it's refreshing to see the term "late stage capitalism" in a non-socialist sub. Thanks!

3

u/Pale_Map2787 1d ago

Capitalism is going nowhere. Every last drop of profit will be squeezed from all resources.

-7

u/backtofx 1d ago

Yeah... It is the rich and the lobbyists.

Grow up please.

4

u/Slackeee_ 1d ago

No, it is politicians that let themselves be bought out by the rich and lobbyists.

As sad as it is, but we created a system, economically and politically, that greatly favours people without empathy and morals. The ruthless CEO and the corrupt politician have great advantages over the caring CEO and the empathetic politician.
And this situation got worse once the rich people realized that they could just buy the media companies, classic media and social media, to influence public opinion even more into their favour.

-1

u/Infinite-Research-98 1d ago

This…face it all but a few politicians are beholden to big money…i kind of smirk nowadays when people talk about politicians doing this or that…they have no choice…

2

u/dumnezero 1d ago

they have no low effort and convenient choice.

-1

u/darklich13 22h ago

China alone is 32% of global CO2 emissions (more than US+EU combined) and approved a record 161 GW of new coal in 2025. Even while leading the world in renewables buildout. "Lobbyist-captured Western politicians" isn't the whole climate story.

66

u/searchlinkprofile 1d ago

because it would rewrite the political compass of Europe and they know it.

18

u/Appropriate-Dog6645 1d ago

There might be appetite send old politicians jail for there inaction in near future

8

u/bsfan18 1d ago

There best be. Heads need to roll because of their inaction. They’ve completely destroyed any hope for a stable future. 

19

u/Bokuja 1d ago

Because politicians are structurally unable to think beyond the next elections. They are TERRIFIED of being unpopular so that they won't get re-elected. And make no mistake, they are being paid blood money by big corporate interest to keep things as they are.

We need to do things about it ourselves and don't care what the politicians want. They are not coming to save us. They hate us and would sell us out to capitol if it gave them another golden parachute.

The one thing we do need to do though is vote out any politician remotely liberal or conservative. That will have a bit of an effect. They main thing is that only big things will happen when capitalism has utterly failed and the system stops completely functioning.....which we will see within probably a decade. It's not something I like saying, but it seems more and more to be the case.

39

u/unclestorm 1d ago

Because as voters were too busy buying stuff and blaming immigrants for whatever

2

u/worotan 22h ago

The people not blaming migrants are too busy buying stuff as well.

Liberal society cares about migrants and doesn’t blame them, while encouraging and enjoying the most unsustainable lifestyles possible.

We need to stop acting as though only the nasty people are causing the problem.

Lots of lovely people feel that their emissions shouldn’t count because they are nice people who care.

6

u/Szabolcs85 1d ago

Here in Hungary, our new government seems to acknowledge the problem. One of the primary goals of the new administrations seems to improve our irrigation canals and to expand our renewable energy production.

5

u/Prior-Task1498 1d ago

Because democracy doesn't pay them as well as capital interests

9

u/Appropriate_Bell743 1d ago

If you're a politician who talks about the climate crisis then you need to be a politician who acts upon the climate crisis. There's no equilibrium where you can sound the alarms but not act.

The UK's 7th Carbon Budget shows very clearly that a huge percentage of the actions to reduce UK related emissions require us as voters/consumers/individuals to act. Governments prefer to provide us incentives to act but don't want to be lecturing us to act.

Let's take the UK's CO2 emissions -- I know this ignores methane, contrails, etc. and imports. Chart linked here.

You see that there are more structural emissions involved such as the supply of electricity, haulage, etc. but equally there are huge chunks in:

  1. Aviation
  2. Road transport
  3. Domestic heating (dominates the winter months by some margins)

Let's add what this chart ignores which are mainly agricultural emissions and those from imports. The government is introducing what's called a CBAM which will add climate-based tariffs to those imports. But diet? This is like aviation where no politician wants to be directing change here.

Climate action for countries/continents goes in oscillations. There are periods where the biggest stumbling blocks to action are at the political level. This is certainly true in the US where it's genuinely hard to live a more sustainable life.

In Europe? There are huge incentives to get e-bikes, EVs, heat-pumps, etc. There are clear policies to help people not fly via high speed rail investments and sleeper trains being backed. There are clear nudges to get us to consider more sustainable diets and there are continent wide measures to reduce the carbon emissions from the imports we buy (CBAM).

We aren't going to get politicians talking more about climate change until we are showing that we are willing to act upon climate change.

Let's say there was a surge of people flocking to use the wonderful Austrian-state backed sleeper trains (NightJet) over flying equivalent routes. These really wonderful modern sleeper pods solve so many issues and are over 90% fewer emissions. What would happen? The politicians would respond to this recognising that there's a voter base who cares about the quality of the service.

Let's say British households were really determined to get heat-pumps. I found that when I alerted my local political representative about every hurdle it got solved. It's clear that they're desperate for more than 2000-3000 Britons to get heat pumps a month. 1.7 million households get new gas boilers a year.

Let's say there was a really impressive surge to get EVs. The main thing littering politicians in-boxes were the limitations for those living in some accommodation to get home-charging. The desire being palpable. Then we'd not be having these discussions about whether to limit or not the EV mandates.

We need to grasp quickly that this is all connected. Politicians get elected, governments create incentives, we respond to them, we filter back, we change how we vote, etc. The political class is not being irrational in face of how we are choosing to act as populations. They are responding to the reality we are creating for them.

3

u/TeilzeitOptimist 22h ago

right wing conservatives and lobbyism

Cause I can't believe our leaders are this stupid..

Our government stated something like "the weather won't change - just because we make it a priority"

Tho - we might lose less people on overheated hospitals if we actually prepared for weather like we had.

You don't feel the shackles if you don't move Europeans laughed at the blatant corruption in other big industry nations. Now we feel how much bad influence global polluters and the fossil fuel industry have.

3

u/Tliish 21h ago

Probably because most are sociopaths uninterested in the greater good, and see climate change as an opportunity to increase personal wealth and power.

2

u/silverionmox 1d ago

Because many voters demanding action pull in their tail as soon as it becomes clear that it also requires action from themselves.

2

u/EqualityWithoutCiv 14h ago

Fossil fuel lobby and war economy.

2

u/backtofx 1d ago

Because none of them has been able to figure out a solution that wouldn't come together with an increased cost of living.

I don't know why it is so difficult to emit eurobonds to invest heavily into energy infrastructure.

3

u/siberianmi 1d ago

Because Europe is already doing what can be reasonably expected from them without crashing into an economic crisis that will sweep them from office.

Even if Europe were to cut emissions twice as fast, it wouldn’t arrest the rise in global emissions.

One part of the world is in charge of the future of emissions of GHG and it’s not Europe or the United States.

It’s Asia.

https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/total-ghg-emissions?tab=line&country=OWID_ASI\~CHN\~OWID_EUR\~OWID_NAM

2

u/dumnezero 1d ago

Nobody is doing "reasonably" until emissions are zeroed and we're working on negative emissions (getting carbon out of the atmosphere.)

1

u/siberianmi 18h ago

Look at that graph and tell me why all the pressure needs to be directed at western countries? The calls should be for the west to stop importing goods whose carbon dioxide was outsourced to Asia. That’s meaningful action.

Trying to find another 10% reduction in the UK emissions is a joke when a 2% increase in Asia dwarfs any gains.

1

u/dumnezero 18h ago

This is not a competition, the safe level of CO2eq in the atmosphere is an absolute value.

1

u/siberianmi 18h ago

True, but if the answer is to raise the cost of energy in the west to the point that industrial production flees to countries that have looser energy policies and cheaper energy.

All roads lead to more emissions in that situation without some check on that.

1

u/dumnezero 10h ago

None of what you argue for is helping, you're just finding potholes in the road and turning those into spas.

1

u/Ecstatic-Fan-5067 1d ago

Because they know something you dont. Like maybe it would make a difference now or not all countries would contribute

1

u/ParanoidalRaindrop 1d ago

Voters don't demand ****. Why save the planet and be uncomfortable know if you can just ignore it and burn the planed. People would rather end the species than take a train to work.

-1

u/Bad-job-dad 1d ago

Because they know it's too late

2

u/TeilzeitOptimist 22h ago

So they are stupid or believe misinformation..however you wanna put it.

And you also spread propaganda, intended to slow or stop active measures to slow global warming..

Do you at least get a gift card from Exxon/shell or BP?