I also have no objection to the political and economic aspects of climate change being discussed, as long as they are discussed in a civil manner. After all, politics and economics are related to everything we do. To exclude politics and economics from the discussion would be to limit the understanding of the issue.
I'm reminded here of that notorious slogan used by Bill Clinton during his election campaign, "It's the economy, stupid."
When comparing the CO2 emissions 'per capita', between China and the rest of the world, there are different approaches which should be clearly defined. The most obvious approach is to divide the total CO2 emissions within the borders of a country, by the total population. But this approach shows only a part of the problem.
For example, Australia exports far more coal than it burns within its own country. Should the total CO2 emissions from all the coal that Australia digs up and exports, be included in the 'per capita' emissions for the average Australian?
Likewise, most of China's CO2 emissions in recent years have resulted from the production of goods which are exported to the rest of the world. The CO2 emissions associated with the production of such goods should therefore be more fairly attributed to the populations that consume the goods.
Sweden has a very low 'per capita' emissions of CO2 within its borders, but that figure increases significantly when one includes the CO2 emissions associated with Sweden's imports from the EU, China and elsewhere.