1. Decrease in quality of life, rather than principled opposition, leads to popular uprisings. (We're in the wealthiest period of human history, and per person, life is basically better every single day.)

2. For most of history it has actually been "the leaders, the rich" etc that were the movers and pushers.

This remains true.

Additionally, in specific reference to your call for individual action/responsibility, I'd ask how you remove the wealthy and prominent from the conversation when, as a group, they're actually the source of most climate denialism in the media?

1. Here there is a disconnect between what people want, and what happens politically.

I want less tax breaks for the rich. I even VOTED for it. As you suggest. I also VOTED for climate action.

Why then are tax breaks happening, and climate change actions not being taken?

The answer is, "We are 'voting for it'. But the money isn't".

So how do we incentivize capital towards climate action so the rich will let our votes matter?

They have to be able to make money from it.

Traditionally, that would mean government subsidies, tax incentives, and tax penalties.

Remember how I mentioned tax breaks? That thing the wealthy got for free (minus the cost of bribes) instead of having to earn it through societally beneficial projects as has been the case through most of the 20th century?

They're in charge now, and they're writing themselves checks for jobs they haven't done basically...

So now even the one method of leverage we had is gone.

So to recap, life is still broadly improving; likely no rebellions any time soon.

The wealthy are aggravating the problem and holding the resources to do something about it hostage, which makes them responsible.

Voting is happening, but money makes it ineffective.

Finally, our available means to enforce a change in behavior in the wealthy for the common good have been hijacked.....by the wealthy..