It was hardly a perfect film, but I keep thinking of Don’t Look Up. In its depiction of a world that stubbornly refuses to heed the warnings of an imminent planetary disaster, it was perhaps too on the nose. But these days, reality itself is too on the nose.

This week served up ample evidence, on both sides of the Atlantic. In Britain, like much of Europe, the all-consuming concern has been intense, intolerable heat, with temperature records shattered and swathes of the country under the highest state of alert. For the first time, red warnings were issued in the UK for three consecutive days. Schools have closed; nights have become sleepless, with the mercury rising to meet the technical definition of “tropical”. There are wildfires in Derbyshire. All this in a temperate country in June.

And where is our politics? It has moved on swiftly from what would once have been a rare, even epochal event – the resignation of a prime minister – shifting focus to the coming man, Andy Burnham, and specifically the question of who he might appoint as chancellor. Burnham world is said to be divided over whether it should be Ed Miliband, with some pushing him as a proven Whitehall operator and ideological ally of the next PM, while others fear he would spook the bond markets.

But the loudest argument heard against the present energy secretary, pushed especially forcefully this week, is his advocacy of net zero: the pursuit of zero carbon emissions by 2050. At a rightwing conference in London dubbed the “anti-woke Davos”, Kemi Badenoch told delegates there was a “villain” to blame for Britain’s economic woes. “His name is Ed Miliband and he has made our country poorer,” she said to applause.

The gathering had been convened by the Alliance for Responsible Citizenship, whose backers include the owner of GB News and a string of fossil fuel companies. Among the officials from the current US administration in attendance was Donald Trump’s energy secretary, Chris Wright, himself a former fossil fuel executive, who described Britain’s green policies as a “tragic mistake”. Wright expressed the hope that a change of leadership in the UK would see the country change course and get into line with the US.

Here’s where it all gets very Don’t Look Up. The thousands of anti-abortion activists, opponents of multiculturalism and climate sceptics who gathered at the conference venue in Olympia, west London, were sweltering inside, according to those who were there. As they applauded the likes of Wright, who believes the dangers of the climate crisis have been exaggerated, they were fanning themselves against a London temperature that remained stubbornly above 35C – using a fan handed out in goodie bags and emblazoned with the slogan, “Free speech never felt so cool”.

Now there may well be good reasons to doubt the wisdom of appointing Miliband to No 11 (though those reasons would have to be set against his familiarity with the ways of the Treasury, compatibility with the PM and record as an effective minister). But among them cannot, surely, be the notion that he is too committed to tackling the climate emergency – not in a week like this. You can argue that some green levies are insufficiently progressive, falling on the poor as well as the rich, but to watch as all of Europe wilts under burning heat, as Germany and Poland brace for 40C, and then castigate Miliband for going too far, too fast, is to have life imitate satirical art. It is to align yourself with the characters from the 2021 movie who, on learning that a comet is barrelling at speed towards Earth, decide the solution is to avert their eyes from the sky.

Yet, sadly, it is not only the self-styled anti-woke crowd who are making this mistake. Miliband’s critics include several trade unions, enraged by his opposition to new drilling for oil and gas in the North Sea and the jobs that would bring. Tony Blair’s essay last month made the same case for relaxing the push towards net zero. In Canada, Mark Carney has dismantled multiple green measures, and even the European commission in Brussels is easing the pressure. Given the desperate need for economic growth, I understand why net zero can seem like an unaffordable luxury. But look up: it’s a life-saving essential.

What the film got right is that impending planetary catastrophe can induce a response less egregious but scarcely less dangerous than outright denial – and that is distraction and displacement. Even when faced with incontrovertible evidence of the looming threat, people will find something else to talk about. That was my response to seeing the slightly reddish faces and linen suits of the BBC’s Newsnight panellists on Thursday as they discussed the announcement that King Charles and the queen will no longer live at Buckingham Palace. Don’t get me wrong, it was interesting. But clearly it was also raging hot outside, even as the clock inched towards midnight.

In the US, the subject of the hour is Donald Trump’s apparent mission to Make Metaphor Literal Again, specifically the saga of his botched repairs to the reflecting pool that stands at the foot of the Lincoln memorial. The same US president who promised to “drain the swamp” in Washington DC has created an actual stinking, lurid-green swamp in the centre of the city.

I’m the last person to criticise anyone for talking about this fiasco: on the contrary, my colleague Arwa Mahdawi and I took a deep dive into it – the subject, not the pool – for the latest episode of the Politics Weekly America podcast. This is not a mere media fixation. Trump himself can’t stop talking about it. It merits discussion, because it distils so perfectly the Trump modus operandi: announce a goal on a whim, pay no attention to the obvious risks – and then pretend you’ve succeeded when everyone can see that you’ve failed. Whether it’s war on Iran or war on algae, it’s the same modus operandi.

But, though it’s cathartic to see derision rain on Trump, this too is a distraction. Not only from speaking directly about the climate breakdown – clearly, that cannot be the sole topic of collective discussion, even if sometimes it feels as if it should be – but from speaking about anything else including, say, that war with Iran.

For what was it, exactly, that propelled Trump to cave in so spectacularly to Tehran, agreeing a memorandum of understanding that represents an astonishing capitulation to a regime that, less than six months ago, was gunning down its own citizens in their thousands? He has accepted a deal that leaves Tehran much stronger than it was before the war started on 28 February, that promises $300bn (£225bn) in aid, an end to sanctions and the prospect of Iran charging a lucrative toll on global traffic through the strait of Hormuz. All of that without the regime giving up its enriched uranium, ballistic missiles or support for armed proxies Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis. Why would Trump do such a deal? Two words: petrol prices.

The price at the pump had caused Trump’s popularity to tank, and he was ready to do whatever it took to get that number down. In other words, our global addiction to fossil fuel is not only boiling the planet, it is wrecking our world. We can talk about other things, we can look away, we can refuse to look up, but – like the heat bearing down on so many of us at this very moment – we cannot escape it.

• Jonathan Freedland is a Guardian columnist

• Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.