Cryptogon points to a Guardian article quoting James Lovelock saying that we may need to suspend democracy in order to deal with global warming - Lovelock: Authoritarian System Needed to Deal with Global Warming. Of course, given that he thinks humanity is doomed to collapse to a few remnant breeding pairs in the arctic, it would seem that politics wouldn't be high on the agenda in future if his predictions are true, so maybe he should just shut up (or at least be ignored from here on in).
We need a more authoritative world. We’ve become a sort of cheeky, egalitarian world where everyone can have their say. It’s all very well, but there are certain circumstances – a war is a typical example – where you can’t do that. You’ve got to have a few people with authority who you trust who are running it. And they should be very accountable too, of course.

But it can’t happen in a modern democracy. This is one of the problems. What’s the alternative to democracy? There isn’t one. But even the best democracies agree that when a major war approaches, democracy must be put on hold for the time being. I have a feeling that climate change may be an issue as severe as a war. It may be necessary to put democracy on hold for a while.