I don't believe people should agree with me. I believe you and I are on the same page in this respect. People should assess carefully prepared and responsibly presented analysis, from a multiple of sources depending on the importance of the matter, and decide on what their actions will be. I used this process to advise my government. Not enough people follow this method though. They keep listening to news that suits their mood, in echo chambers. Not good. Nor is having leaders who surround themselves with sycophants and loyalists, as per Putin in Russia and now Trump in the US.
Socialism is a word Americans use for what everyone else calls cooperation.
If you're not seeing clear information about rapidly increasing temperatures and the effects, you might be in an echo chamber.
What am I doing? At the personal level, through design and effort our household uses a fraction of the energy, water and fuel compared with our neighbours. My wife and I went blue-water sailing after retiring. That helped us hone our skills in conserving resources. Our adult children see the point and cooperate (sorry, that should be socialismate).
At a community level, I am developing a platform which will encourage and enable city dwellers to personally contact and sponsor farmers, who will plant trees in their name. City folk will be able to personally offset carbon emissions they cannot presently avoid, such as from air travel or driving classic cars. Having a tree or many with your name on it will mean more to people than paying a random, voluntary or mandatory carbon offset charge. Farmers will have a new source of income, from the payments and from the timber down the track. Some farmers will find it more lucrative than running cattle or sheep, especially when manufactured meat disrupts the livestock industry and rural land prices fall. Ooof.
Leading by example? Perhaps.