In other words, while I am sure that "fossil fuel industry" was never motivated by purely altruistic ideas, we have also to take in account that the standard of living we take for granted is in large part due to "fossil fuel industry and all other gross industrial polluters".
I do try to keep a low personal climate profile, but there is only so much each individual can do, while still being able to sustain a living under the current system.
Industry has been given a free pass for far too long, their pollution has been grandfathered in and even considered a necessary evil in the name of Holy Profit. But we are no longer so ignorant to their deleterious effect on our climate and (to put a point on it) the continued existence of humanity on this planet.
Corporations could have shaped up and improved their environmental profiles decades and decades ago, when climate scientists first started pointing out the problems. But their didn't, because it was more profitable to continue poisoning the environment and clear cutting the rainforests.
Personally I think they would just pass the price along. We'd then be back to protests in the streets of France because none of those people are idiots. Plus the idea that raising the price of energy won't have knock on effects on the rest of the economy seems doubtful.
In the long run, the solution is to completely rattle the very foundations of capitalism, but the world is not quite ready yet.
Even if the timing was very stupid (mixing it with a tax cut for very high income individuals to entice them to relocate to Paris from London post-Brexit, even if in the end that tax cut pays for itself), the French gov. tried to do the "right" thing, and it completely failed to communicate this. (As far as I know.)
The biggest reason was the tax cuts (which will not pay for themselves, that's nonsense like all trickle-down theory) and the complete slashing of public transit and transportation alternatives for people outside of Paris, Marseille etc.
Thanks to tax cuts and reforms, the people living in small towns and rural areas have literally no alternative, they have to use a car. So by trying to greenwash corrupt policies with a at-the-pump fuel tax, the French government would in effect be forcing a highly regressive tax on ordinary people, who are already struggling to make ends meet, while completely neglecting to deal with the highly polluting fossil fuel and transportation businesses.
It's not trickle down theory. Paris overtook London as the city with most high-net-worth individuals. Thus a lot of people are not paying taxes in Paris as opposed to London.
Though, of course, it depends how much money they end up actually paying compared to the lost revenue. But this is the one point that I can accept. The others are unacceptable, we are in agreement about them.
They have been allowed to poison the world for far too long.
As an ordinary person, what you need to do is shift your priority to vote almost exclusively based on environmental policies of the candidate, get involved in politics and not give in to people who claim it's "no big deal".
I think this is a commendable initiative from Piketty et. al., which actually has a chance of being supported by a large number of people. Personally I don't think it's nearly hard-hitting enough, but it's a good start.