We would not go so far as to say that Ms. Thunberg is correct in her every utterance but in this following she is entirely so:

“Ending fossil capitalism doesn't mean we have to implement socialism. We're stuck in an unimaginative 20th century debate. Regardless of what we'll call the economic system, it is essential that it functions within the planetary boundaries."

The reason we know this to be true being that the IPCC itself has been stating it is true for several decades now.

Look to the economic models that underpin the entire enterprise. Roughly speaking, as a pencil sketch you understand, A1 among the models is a globalised and free market capitalism, A2 a not-globalised version of same. B1 is a globalised social democracy shading into vaguely socialist world and B2 is a non-globalised version of same.

The non-globalised versions - A2 and B2 - are notably worse in outcomes than the globalised ones. More and poorer people with higher emissions.

A1 produces a world notably richer, per capita, than B1. Logically it should be preferred as long as that is possible within those planetary boundaries the analysis is claiming. It is possible. A1T - again the pencil sketch but largely a model in which we work on solar, wind and so on as we have been doing and succeed as we have been doing - produces an emissions outcome in which, as with B1, climate change becomes a passing annoyance rather than something truly dangerous.

No, please, before anyone starts shouting go and look at the models.

Note, please, that absolutely nothing outside the IPCC’s own analysis is being used to make this point. No claims of it isn’t happening, or it’s not us, or natural variability or conspiracy. Also, of course, no claims that perhaps the IPCC hasn’t got matters right or that there are problems with the theory. Within the analysis presented to us as proving that something must be done about climate change is an equal insistence that abolishing capitalism, or instituting socialism, isn’t the answer. Or isn’t the necessary answer if you wish the stronger position.

Great Thunberg is entirely correct here. Even if it is only here, on this point, that she is correct. Ending climate change doesn’t require socialism. Something which, while it will annoy those still looking for some excuse or other for socialism, will please those many tens of billions of the future population who won’t have to suffer said socialism.