Fair enough - but that’s something that most climate advocates would consider a failure, not a partial success. Which is why there’s so much handwringing, and why Greens and climate advocates are lamenting the world’s stupidity and short-sightedness.
My point, though, is that landing between 2 and 3 C is not going to result in a global hellscape. It’s not going to result in your kids (and their kids) having horrible lives. Or even lives that are materially worse than our lives as kids. Or even necessarily lives that are worse than if we had implemented all the costly (to the OECD) policies to keep temp rises below 2 C.
The people in western advanced economies who are resisting expensive action against climate change aren’t necessarily being foolish or short-sighted. The marginal costs of climate action rise the more you try to reduce emissions, and you can get to “negative but manageable for people in the OECD” outcomes far more cheaply than “below 1.5 C” outcomes. Which is why climate policy as applied looks the way it does.