Nah. The problem with climate change is path dependence, starting with the industrial revolution, which was built on coal.
Nor do I accept the third world "blaming" the first world, let them reduce their population to what it was in 1700, and there would be plenty of room in the "carbon budget" for them to industrialize.
History is what it is, the blame game is silly.
The industrial revolution raised most of the world out of dire poverty, now its legacy is going to create difficulties, but none as severe as the four horsemen who regularly visited all of humanity.
Nor was global warming obvious, the first measurements were made by the US Navy back I think in the 1970s.
At that time, global cooling (partially b/c of fear of nuclear winter, also b/c legitimate concern there might be a new ice age, or even just a mini-ice age - that would devastate world agriculture) was a bigger concern than global warming.
There was also a lot of questions when it came to climate models (and still are with regard to climate impact modeling), the proponents of those models tended to exaggerate their ability to predict a complex phenomenon that was poorly understood.
Now this doesn't mean climate deniers were blameless, but many observers lumped in with the deniers were simply skeptics who wanted more data. By 2000, the amassed evidence validated the climate change models, by 2020, anyone doubting the reality of climate change is a fool, ignorant or in the pay of Exxon or the Club For Growth.
The optimal policy would be a gradually increasing carbon tax that would allow market forces to shift the world to a low carbon economy (including carbon tariffs on imports to prevent carbon intensive industry from relocating abroad). Unfortunately, that's politically infeasible because it's opposed by the Left (too regressive) and the Far Right (it would interfere with "drain America first" policies that benefit major Republican donors in the energy industry).
So subsidies and regulations are the "third best" solution to support the transition to a low carbon economy. Green the grid, then electrify the rest of the economy. However, this does not create the right incentives for energy efficiency, so regulations that require more efficient cars, appliances, industrial processes have to substitute for a carbon tax.
We are going to blow past the 2C target, because countries like India won't transition until mid-century, and their large populations means they'll increase energy consumption for decades. Hopefully, we can stop before 3C, and be able to adapt to the changes climate change will bring - fishing in the Florida reefs (from Georgia to the Keys) should be wonderful! One important step will be to stop the socialization of coastline risk, why should taxpayers subsidize insurance and the rebuilding of mansions and condos along the coastlines or in flood prone areas?