Yes, we should change the units to have a more rational approach, that doesn't boil down to a new version of first world colonialism that tells the undeveloped world they missed the boat and now can't catch up because we've already wrecked the environment on their behalf.
So, if you want to care about the environment, and the state of the developed world, you're going to need to allow for compromise to exist. If you refuse this compromise, yes, you are incidentally approaching the same outcome the eugenicists want.
> that doesn't boil down to a new version of first world colonialism that tells the undeveloped world they missed the boat and now can't catch up because we've already wrecked the environment on their behalf.
When the first world started burning oil and coal, solar panels and nuclear reactors didn't exist. Now they do, and undeveloped countries don't have to invent them again in order to use them. This is cheaper than what first world countries have to do because they don't have to pay to build a coal-fired power plant only to shut it down while it's still functional and build a solar farm to replace it. They can just start with the solar farm.
There is 1 single earth, its not getting bigger nor smaller. Dont know about you but I couldnt care less about some pollution per capita or similar. What about pollution per km2, or m3 of water? Nobody is stating goal is 0 or we failed.
Not sure why you try to divert discussion that way, its too obvious and not working.
The ratio of (pollution/living person) will decrease. Unless you want to start unaliving people then this is a fixed fact of the world we live on.