I think this is a common strategy of big players at any industry.
First, they do some dirty thing to gain a competitive edge when the industry is still new and unregulated. Later they develop an alternative way to achieve the same competitive edge, and then criticize other players for doing an old way, saying they should be "mature and responsible".
See also first world countries industrializing/modernizing & becoming rich/lifting people out of poverty using industrial techniques that pollute heavily, then "going green" and criticizing other players (India, China) for doing the same thing, saying they should be "mature and responsible".
Not really. "Going green" is a radical new concept for humanity that goes counter to all incentives and instincts and only recent developments have shown that painful measures are necessary. It was not a trick to get rich at other peoples expense.
India and China are suffering from their own pollution and have incentives to "go green" all by themselves, not because the West demands it.
Green technology is often high tech and tech that is accepted in Western markets and is helping to lift people out of poverty through market mechanism, not finger pointing.
Finally the first world got rich several generations ago. We are not related in any way, shape or form to any real or perceived sins of our grandfathers. Any such idea is old testament biblical theology.
"Going green" is a relatively new concept, even for Western countries. By 1960 the West was seriously polluting its environment, but also extremely affluent and highly developed. There was far more of a gap between the average American and someone in Asia or Africa compared to today. The West polluted the developing world in the same way it polluted the Hudson or Cuyahoga.
It's not really about pulling up the ladder, but a recognizing that growth doesn't have to mean completely destroying the planet. It's more about where the standards are set and what is socially acceptable or understood.
> It's not really about pulling up the ladder, but a recognizing that growth doesn't have to mean completely destroying the planet.
It's not recognizing anything, because it hasn't been demonstrated that growth is still compatible with not completely destroying the planet. It's deciding to not destroy the planet, and if that means pulling up the latter then golly gee sucks to be anyone who isn't up yet. We sure hope there are other ways up, but that's not much consolation.
They should be mature and responsible, the west should have been, too, and has a long way to go.
We both are probably distant cousins due to our relation through Ghengis Khan, but that doesn't mean I should be bitter that I can't make my fortune by pillaging half the world like my distant ancestor did to great effect. It might be easy to make a fortune pillaging, but that doesn't mean I deserve to pillage because someone else did (or does), and I think I am in the right in detesting the scattered bands of warlords left in this world who do make their living by pillaging.
First, they do some dirty thing to gain a competitive edge when the industry is still new and unregulated. Later they develop an alternative way to achieve the same competitive edge, and then criticize other players for doing an old way, saying they should be "mature and responsible".