The philosopher Wilhelm Dilthey believed that historians who judge past events by the standards of later eras are acting ahistorically and arbitrarily. It was more valid and illuminating, he suggested, to ask whether earlier statesmen’s actions were internally consistent and well-aligned with existing circumstances, an approach that he called “immanent critique.”1 In judging contemporary climate policies, some scientists and environmental activists resemble the historians of whom Dilthey complained. They ignore the government’s own priorities, its constraints, and the broader political context in which climate policy is formulated. Judged by such unworldly standards, no actual governmental climate policy is likely to win approval
