For reference: Richest 1% emit as much planet-heating pollution as two-thirds of humanity www.oxfam.org/en/press-rel....

I believe that we can, mainly for two reasons: 1) There are many economic activities that increase GDP and emissions without doing anything useful (e.g. bitcoin mining). 2) Consumption of the richest 5% globally can still be reduced without harming Western median income earners (think yachts etc.).

The real question therefore is: Can we give up certain economic activities to reduce emissions without decreasing the living standards of Western median income earners?

The goal of degrowth is not to fix (or decrease) global GDP while achieving a Western median income for everyone. The goal of degrowth is to reduce emissions while focusing on living standards instead of GDP. This may reduce GDP but not in the same way as a recession.

Interesting argument but I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding about what people usually mean by "degrowth".