Why are they mutually exclusive? Let's say the construction of gigafactory complexes (which would produce materials for solar, wind, batteries, and other renewables), at first requires 100% non-renewable resources to build. But by the fifth factory, it's only 70% non-renewables, and by the tenth., it's 20%... you get the idea.

Or why not convert existing infrastructure, such as dirty coal plants, to clean steam (via geothermal deep well supercritical steam generation)?

How do you sell de-growth to the world? Why rest the entire fate of humanity upon it? It seems we can do so much in parallel, such as create competitive markets for carbon re-sequestration, while we cool the poles with marine cloud brightening and reduce climate super pollutants like methane.

I find the binary between de-growth OR a switch to renewables to be unconvincing. We can do both. And trust me when I say, on a personal level, I wish every other one of my fellow Americans would learn to live with less!