It is "one minute to midnight", according to Boris Johnson. Prince Charles claims that the world needs to be on a "war-like footing". UN Secretary-GeneralThe head of the United Nations. They are often tasked with mediating in international disputes. Antonio Guterres has called for an end to "diplomatic niceties" and a "massive mobilisation" of political will.

Yesterday, leaders from all over the world heeded their call as they flocked to Glasgow for COP26Cop stands for  Conference of the Parties (COP) to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, billed as the last chance to save the world from climate breakdown. For the next ten days, in a special UN-controlled zoneTo ensure that discussions take place on neutral ground, the UK has ceded the venue to the UN. Scottish police will not be allowed to enter unless invited by the UN chief., they will thrash out plans for halting the emergency.

Scientists believe that we have as little as nine years left to prevent the very worst consequences of global heating, and have called for drastic action now to keep global temperature rises below 1.5CThe limit of global heating beyond which the climate emergency becomes critical. It could cause the melting of all Arctic summer ice and alter the Gulf Stream, making parts of the world uninhabitable..

Yet all this might cause a sense of deja vuA sense that something you have not seen before is somehow familiar. It is a French phrase meaning "already seen" or "seen before".. Before the last international climate summit in 2019, known as COP25, Guterres warned that "the point of no-return is no longer over the horizon". Then, too, scientists demanded radical action. But the conference was widely regarded as a failure, with important decisions on emissions cuts delayed. 

The same thing happened at COP24 in 2018. Indeed, many of the leaders who arrived in Glasgow yesterday had come straight from a G20 summit in Rome that failed to reach an agreement on phasing out coal.

That is why some see a clear pattern in these climate summits. World leaders talk about how strict measures are needed to save the planet. Then they block, dilute, or put off those measures, only to do it all over again the next year.

So why, if they believe the climate crisis is a threat to the human race, do they keep refusing to take action?

Some think the answer lies in democracy. They argue that politicians are unwilling to impose the measures that are really needed to halt the climate emergency because they are afraid of losing elections.

In order to keep global heating below catastrophic levels, they claim, people in rich countries will need to change their diets, eating less meat and buying more local food. They will have to fly much less and buy much less.

And they will have to drop the idea that has dominated economic thinking for the last three hundred years: that constant economic growth is both good and necessary. We might even need to enter an era of economic degrowthA theory that argues economic growth should be replaced as the central measure of economic development with economic, environmental and social justice..

All this will restrict people's choices and make their lives less comfortable. It is a grim pitch to make to the electorate.

That is why some think the only answer is to take to the streets. They believe that since there will not be a democratic majority in favour of such strict climate measures, direct actionThe name given to protests and other forms of political engagement outside voting and negotiation. is the only way of putting pressure on politicians.

But others think all hope is not lost. Green politics are entering the mainstream: green parties are enjoying more support, and polling shows a majority of the world population want stronger targets to address climate breakdown. It may still be possible to secure a democratic mandate for halting the climate emergency.

Yes, say some. For as long as there is no electoral advantage in it, politicians will not come clean about the sacrifices people will have to make to save the planet. The only way to force their hand is constant street protests, so that it becomes more inconvenient not to impose climate measures.

Not so fast, say others. During the pandemic, people proved that they are willing to accept huge inconveniences in their lives for the greater good. They understand that the future of the human race is at stake, and we should not simply assume that they will always vote down strict climate measures.