I think the right metaphor to demonstrate the argument being made is you are coupled to the other car and it doesn't matter if you turn off your engine, you're both hitting the wall anyway if the other car doesn't decide to stop too.
I don't know if hope is enough. I don't think people are willing to be miserable for hope- especially when there is no reasonable expectation that others would stop.
I disagree that you need to be miserable. Humans are very good at getting used to their circumstances, and some of the changes would be net positives on the personal level. I know I'm way happier now that I ride my bicycle as my main method of transportation.
But also, climate change is already making us miserable. I went on vacation and it was impossible to be outside between 12-3, so we had to plan our days around that. It's not a choice between happy and miserable, it's a tradeoff between less than ideal situations.
What works for you doesn't work for everyone. There are many, many places in the world where using a bicycle as a main method of transportation would be impractical and miserable. Short of force, this isn't going to happen.
Yes, the entire idea is to refactor our cities and societies so that most people can and do use the low carbon option.
It's not commuting 40Km by bicycle, it's raising the price of gas to the point that people choose to live at a distance where they can bicycle to work. At the same time you need to build housing and bike infrastructure to make sure everyone can have access to it.
Not everyone lives in a city. 'Refactoring' the planet is a pipe dream in the short term. It's not possible in the timeframe being discussed. People in the larger thread suggest that its better to get the dying over with now since it'll happen anyway. When food stops moving, it'll be the cities that fall first. A bicycle won't help.
