Category: News & Fair Start Headlines

  • Not Prioritizing a Fair Start in Life for All Kids Did More to Harm Animals Than the ASPCA Did to Help Them

    Not Prioritizing a Fair Start in Life for All Kids Did More to Harm Animals Than the ASPCA Did to Help Them

    Fact: More animals are suffering and dying because of growth, our failure to develop empathy in children, climate change and other related factors, than the ASPCA is saving with their current suite of interventions.

    Urge their lead to include Fair Start reforms in their programming.

     

    A comparison chart of Current Family Planning vs. Fair Start Family Planning. The left side lists negatives of current planning; the right side highlights positive outcomes of fair start planning for welfare, equality, and environmental protection.

     

    Why Fair Start? 

    Funding that ensures no child is born beneath a set level of entitlement, consistent with the Children’s Rights Convention and Right to a Healthy Environment, is exponentially the most just and effective way to protect our future and free all of us. The creation of power relations is usually the biggest driver of social justice outcomes because it operates on many levels, simultaneously. 

    We can ensure that funding by using the extreme wealth in the world today that was made by not paying the costs of avoiding climate, autocratic and other harms to future generations. The legitimate and reparative standard – being fair – will save millions of lives, and trillions of dollars. 

    This is not a choice, but an obligation. 

    Every entity in the United States is and  should be forced to comply with civil rights laws prohibiting discrimination in hiring, housing, education, etc. But not extending protections to infants who would suffer the consequences of historic injustice – maintaining the separate but equal doctrine in reproductive rights, child welfare and family law  – was a horrific mistake killing many. Infants should not pay the price of our mistakes, and world leaders should not be able to evade facing the lies and failures that fundamentally caused the climate crisis. 

    Being fundamentally illegitimate, or non-inclusive, seeded in our brains the idea that our birth and developmental positionality was organic, rather than the result of short-sighted policy. As described below, the solution involves a defiance, truth and reconciliation process, akin to anti-apartheid movements, where we all admit we benefitted at cost to others based on injustice, and we turn to now honor our obligations to the victims through legal, organizational and grassroots reforms.

     

    Challenging assumptions that hurt our future infographic

     

    The Key Barrier: Deadly Omissions 

    However there are entities now funding charities, media, politicians and academics who silo social justice issues away from birth equity, and use omissive and fraudulent messaging that hides their liability and the entitlement systems ensuring the death of millions as the climate crisis accelerates. 

    As described below Fair Start is urging officials to contrast the claims of beneficial public impact being made by these entities and those they fund with actual harms to women and infants – correctly measured relative to a neutral position rather than the fictitious standards that created the climate and related crises  – as these things accelerate. Not omitting the impacts of children entering the world, admitting the use of failed and fraudulent standards, and inverting our obligation from the powerful to first women and children, can save lives. 

    If those Fair Start engages truly value the things (like biodiversity) they took credit for protecting, they will be eager to now cover the costs to others of not having previously included the value in our basic systems of constitution and obligation, and to include the things they claim to value as we constitute relations going forward. 

    Fact: When impacts are correctly measured, not prioritizing a measurably fair start in life for all children did exponentially more harm to most stated missions of organizations than those organizations did good. In many cases they will have spent more on lavish travel and events, or other incidentals, than actually furthering their mission. 

    Intergenerational justice legitimates nations, making them capable of representing their constituents. We all do this together, by ensuring no child is born beneath a threshold of investment that would give them an influential equity stake in their democracies. Not having done this to date has condemned millions to die in a climate crisis, while the children of the wealthy families who benefited from illegitimacy have been enriched.

    Despite the interference, many have already begun to engage in this more effective form of constituting a just future – through language and action – by admitting the failure of systems to date, agreeing to change the way be plan families, and exchanging resources. This transfer of wealth made at deadly costs is also required by law. 

    All law must first be interpreted to assure legitimacy, or the measurable inclusion and empowerment of those subject to it, so that truly representative governance is possible. In other words, the threshold or border, of empowering development, overrides the authority represented by national borders because it is needed to legitimate such law.

     

    Reality, equality, equity, and liberation

     

    There are many wealthy families and other concentrations of power in those nations most responsible for the climate crisis who benefitted from unsustainable reproductive rights models. These models used a false premise (that having children is more self-determining for the parents than other-determining for the children born and communities they will comprise) to assume as inherent certain entitlements, and to avoid the overriding need for legitimate governance to ensure measurable empowerment of each citizen. 

    These families bypassed the first local question in legitimacy: How to first account for our vast generational, racial and other inequitable positionalities in reforming legal systems with objective standards, like human rights. And they seeded a thing in political systems, a capacity to harm others and determine much about their lives, that masqueraded as freedom much the way reproductive freedom devoid of equity does.

    This hid the overriding nature of the upstream creation of power relations behind the downstream subject area of population, and conflated a false view of bodily autonomy, one based on inequity and a capacity to harm others, with true autonomy or measurable self-determination through positioning in one’s democracy.

    The former would enable a woman to terminate her pregnancy only to die months later in a heat wave because she was born with the inherited wealth inequity that comes with being black, could not afford air conditioning, and had little influence over her political system to challenge all of that.  

    Neither business nor government has been historically tasked with defining the ideals of social justice. The wealthy families behind philanthropy generally did that, and in avant-garde movements like animal rights and liberation. But by simultaneously individualizing the idea of reproductive autonomy to isolate women, evade child equity, and ensure unsustainable growth, they created a false reference point for self-determination. It treated children of color as worth exponentially less investment in birth and development, and by fundamentally enabling growth, triggered a climate crisis killing some while enriching others. 

    This created a fictitious baseline for cost and benefit analysis and national legitimacy in which we never first account for our own positionality, situating our autonomy with regard to the need for others to have equitable shares in democracy, and relative to key, real world markers like ecological carrying capacities or resources for early childhood development guaranteed by the Children’s Rights Convention. This has fundamentally driven and exacerbated the climate crisis by exploiting rather than including and measurable empowering, children as they entered the world. The claims of public benefit that arise from it maintain a fantasy world that enriches mostly white children at deadly cost to millions of children of color. 

    This baseline has subverted the civil rights and anti-apartheid movements by undoing with family inequity upstream the good these families claimed to be doing downstream – a move that exponentially catalyzed the climate and related crises, while aiming the harm of the crises towards the least responsible for it, and most vulnerable to it. If the Three-Fifths Compromise in U.S. history fractionalized the worth of persons of color, the one-tenth and greater illegal disparities in generational wealth that violate legally enforceable children’s rights regimes will now mean the death of millions of children of color in a climate crisis caused primarily by white wealth.

    These unsustainable practices and systems ensured children entering under just thresholds, and thus overshoot of ecological carrying capacities, the degradation of those capacities, and the disempowerment of the average person to respond to the ensuing crises. They allowed wealthy white families to amass wealth, at illegal and deadly cost to generations of black families. 

     

    Infographic comparing Top Down Power vs. Bottom Up Empowerment for birth equity, listing social impacts of each approach—including potential risks like legitimacywashing when using top-down strategies. Includes icons of people, scales, graduation cap, and supportive hands.

     

    These wealthy families and other entities are now funding charities, media, politicians and academics who silo social justice issues away from birth equity, and use omissive messaging – a form of entitlement and impact, or equity fraud –  that hides their liability as well as illegal macro entitlement systems ensuring the death of millions as the climate crisis accelerates. Fraud is intentionally benefitting at harm to others based on misinformation, including omissions. If you ask the right questions, those engaged in it become obvious: They start by assuming entitlements that contradict the impact they claim, and by enabling the industries they claim to fight.

    Ensuring Truth and Justice for All: Zero Baseline Accounting 

    Fair Start is now urging states attorneys generals and other responsible agencies to 1) track the multifaceted impacts of infants entering the world in the U.S. and abroad on their and their mothers’ capacity for self-determination – the highest standard for evaluation, using concrete metrics urged as the zero-baseline form of harm-assessment standardization at the United Nations. This includes interpreting our civil rights laws, under things like the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, as requiring us to treat infants as a priority protected class entitled to funding that would delay and improve birth and development conditions.  

    That baseline represents an objective and inclusive valuation of freedom, one that includes the key perspective of full context, including impacts on the most vulnerable. Focusing there, on things like what  Dr. Breeze Harper called the primacy of Black Birth Equity, accounts for the creation of power disparities in birth, development, and emancipation. 

    We are asking these and other officials to then 2) contrast these impacts with current and historic (ten years back, as a minimum but in many cases with disclosures needed to 2003) sustainability, legitimate entitlement and authority, equity and other public benefit claims, and the use of fundamentally unsustainable and fraudulent family entitlements, used by prominent leaders and organizations within their jurisdictions. This tracking enables preemptive reparations, structured to prevent harm to future generations and to ensure their right to self-determine. The effort is being launched in tandem with filings before the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights (ACPHR), setting demands for reparations that can be carried by activists in the United States whose children are also dying from the crisis. 

    Simply put, we are asking officials to assess public benefit impact claims from the accurate baseline for self-determination, relative to real world markers, rather than from the fictitious baseline that assumes black lives are worth less and uses omission to hide white wealth as a driver of the deaths of countless children of color. 

    This fraudulent standard of entitlement, impact, and legitimacy allows many to benefit at deadly cost to others by claiming beneficial public impacts that are actually being undone each day.   

    What are the metrics and moves – different facets of the threshold for self, as opposed to other, determination – exemplified in action here?

    • Funding would-be mothers delay, readiness and safe locating so that no child is born beneath a concrete line of what their rights guarantee them, without abuse or neglect, and what trust-based (democratic) communities require including not exploiting children’s positionality. Read more here.
    • Restoring, not mitigating, climate emissions to natural levels. Read more here. 
    • Taking the exact resources needed to ensure equality of opportunity for children of color, competitive with white kids. Read more here. 
    • Conditioning political and economic authority on their moving towards truly representative ratios between officials and their constituents, and recognizing the need for those in positions of influence to carry the risk of any violence not doing so creates. Read more here.
    • Benchmarking efficiency to equity measures around the high capacity for humans through equitable development and empowerment, rather than the exploitation that created a climate crisis killing millions of innocents. Read more here. 

    Equity Fraud 

    The failed models have used a fictitious baseline and false premise that hid the upstream antecedent language that entailed the creation of power relations, often behind downstream subjects like population, environment, animal rights, human rights, etc. To constitute, as in national constitutions, means to be obligated. Our debt to children is a chance to actually constitute a just society, and to do so because of shared obligations, not because a bunch of white men with guns (or money backed by guns) are forcing you to. This moves from the bottom upwards – governance contingent on the measurable emancipation of youth – not inherently authorized top down.

    The families and concentrations of wealth and power driving the fundamentally unfair systems never really created value, relative to an objective standard like a healthy climate or the unity of value we find in mutual self-determination. Instead they first used poor family planning to create their own audiences and artificial ever-increasing overall demand by treating children as means rather than ends, ensuring dismal standards for child development, education and critical thinking. This slowly converted democratic relations into commercial ones. 

    This violated children’s rights by treating people as economic inputs rather than citizens, and in systems where the average vote was actually being diluted to uselessness, while wealthier families benefited from the appearance of inclusive and functional democracies. A system of fundamental entitlements likely to – through unsustainable growth – kill millions of innocent persons is generally considered a value failure. 

    Activists now with the Fair Start Movement, in prior employment, had to omit facts that would have shown public interest information and interventions being vastly undone by growth and inequity. This was a charade of environmental sustainability and social justice that is still today being vastly undone every day as children enter the world without the resources they need. Activists working with fair start can literally attest to using wealth made at cost to their stated missions to drown out the voices of the vulnerable – especially communities of color –  who could actually accomplish the mission through more fundamental reforms.

     

    Don't Get Scammed: Charities, Media and Big Business Use Family Policy to Quietly Undo Progress. Ask This One Question Before Giving, Believing, or Buying Infographic

     

    Under the fraudulent entitlement scheme there are two standards for justice: The real or what should have been, measured at a zero baseline using concrete markers for assessing equity, and self versus other determination. There was also the widely used decoy standard, which centered on assumed legitimacy of white wealth supremacy at birth, and an illusion of bodily autonomy that conflated freedom with the capacity to harm others. 

    Those who use the latter are choosing that the least responsible for the climate crisis suffer its greatest cost, with no justification, increasing climate deaths by millions and costs by trillions. 

    The Fundamental Fix 

    However, the disparity between what we think and say, and the reality of what we do to children and animals relative to objective measures, opens a doorway to legitimacy and freedom. 

    Again, to constitute, as in national constitutions, means to be obligated. Our debt to children is a chance to actually constitute a just society, and from the base, rather than under the standards of those who act as if they are above us. Covering these child development costs as an obligation liberates more than oppresses. 

    But this true control of who has influence over us requires measuring from zero. And that would be impossible without the admission of the specific harm we have caused and the changing of our obligation from those in power instead towards infants and animals. We thus ask all to admit benefit at deadly cost to others, and to back reparations. 

    Where else would liberating / obligatory relations come from? As shown above this “truth and reconciliation” process of removing birth apartheid requires reprioritizing wealth to incentivize and entitle would-be mothers so that no child is born beneath a measurable threshold of self-determination. 

    It is physically impossible to be free, as in self-determining, if we cannot ask and then assure that persons are created, developed and emaciated in ways that offset equally their capacity to influence political systems equally, relative to a neutral position or objective standard for evaluation. Those entering the world are either not empowered, or we all have no choice but to be subjected to their power and influence – including the degradation of the environment around us. We should instead empower the governed, not the government and the wealthy. And it’s very hard to change a future child’s prospects once they are born, so justice should focus on thresholds beneath which children should not be born. 

    Instead of funding those thresholds, those engaged in equity fraud have continued to assume exponential (and very deadly) wealth and resilience disparities are natural – that their and their children’s birthright privileges are just a given – when calculating things like permissible climate emissions. 

     

    By Intentionally Ignoring Growth and Inequity Nonprofits, Media and Business Leaders Created a Fantasy World of Progress That Prevented Real Climate Reforms, and Will Kill Millions

     

    Fair Start’s action before the United Nations enables liberation from this nonsense. It simply asks anyone relying on any legal authority to derive back to the most preemptive source of legitimacy, an exercise that inevitably ends with the need to prioritize entitlements that would measurably empower all children through improved birth and development conditions, ensuring them a fair start in life and share equity in democracy. 

    Under the universally preemptive standard that ensures fair starts in life for all kids, we can remove extractive birth entitlements where children of color get a tenth or less of the wealth as white kids, are largely excluded from the political system, and bear the deadly cost of an ecocide they did not create. Again, if those Fair Start chooses to engage truly value the things they took credit for protecting, they will be eager to now cover the costs to others of not having previously included the value in our basic systems of obligation, and to include the things they claim to value as we constitute relations going forward.

    Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation

  • The Idea of Democracy Without a Fair Start in Life is a Scam

    The Idea of Democracy Without a Fair Start in Life is a Scam

    Today the average person has less control over their lives as democracy degrades, and a few take over the lives of many – socially, and ecologically. 

    We can take that power back, because every child’s right to the things they need – like having a voice that matters and is heard in their democracies – comes first, and overrides any authority those above us claim.

     

    Two illustrations compare family planning models: At left, a diverse happy family stands together with icons for community and health. At right, a monochrome crowd in a city. Text contrasts fair start (rights-based) with economic growth-based planning.

     

    Funding every child’s right to a fair start in life – over competing  rights – is the most just and effective solution to the many crises we face today.

    It has an exponentially greater impact than most other interventions, many of which are being undone as children enter the world without the things they need. Ask anyone claiming to do good in the world how children being born without what they need undid the claimed benefit. Current policies have increased overall child abuse and neglect – including child torture and death, undone most of the efforts to mitigate climate change, degraded democracy and increased racial and other deadly inequities.

    Any day that any person or organization does not start their work by shifting wealth to its obligation to fund a fair start in life for every child is a day we undo our work. 

     

    Climate crisis infographic

     

    No child should ever be born outside a structure of debt/savings accounts that protect all children from the climate crisis by including and empowering them with their universal birthright. Our obligations to fund that accounting come before anything we do because it ensures fundamental justice; it creates the inclusive and empowering “we” that must come before all we do. Without this we can’t choose who has influence, and control, over us. We can’t be free.

    TAKE ACTIONS: 1) Donate here to enable Fair Start to ensure family laws consistent with democracy,  2) sign here to say you think Fair Start overrides barriers – like claims to wealth that could instead be used to ensure better family planning,  and 3) urge any charity you support – regardless of the issue – to admit not prioritizing funded fair starts in life for all kids did more harm to their missions than they did good. 

  • Scam Alert: Environmental Charities Allowed Growth to Undo Their Claimed Impacts

    Scam Alert: Environmental Charities Allowed Growth to Undo Their Claimed Impacts

    As the climate crisis intensifies we might all consider getting our money back from those scammy environmental charities who refused to deal seriously with unsustainable growth.

    Why?

    World Population vs. Global Anthropogenic CO2 Emissions

     

    Bressler3

    The solution? 

    If an entity does not think children deserve a fair start in life, do not give them money.

    Funding every child’s right to a fair start in life – over competing  rights – is the most just and effective solution to the many crises we face today. It has an exponentially greater impact than most other interventions, many of which are being undone as children enter the world without the things they need.

    Ask anyone claiming to do good in the world how children being born without what they need undid the claimed benefit. Current policies have increased overall child abuse and neglect – including child torture and death, undone most of the efforts to mitigate climate change, degraded democracy and increased racial and other deadly inequities.

    Any day that any person or organization does not start their work by shifting wealth to its obligation to fund a fair start in life for every child is a day we undo our work. 

     

    Climate crisis infographic

     

    No child should ever be born outside a structure of debt/savings accounts that protect all children from the climate crisis by including and empowering them with their universal birthright. Our obligations to fund that accounting come before anything we do because it ensures fundamental justice; it creates the inclusive and empowering “we” that must come before the things we do. Without this we can’t choose who has influence, and control, over us. We can’t be free.

    TAKE ACTIONS: 1) Donate here to enable Fair Start to  block parents from having kids until they are ready to parent well and have sustainably sized families,  2) sign here to say you think Fair Start overrides barriers – like claims to wealth that could instead be used to avoid having kids before they are ready, and 3) urge any charity you support – regardless of the issue – to admit not prioritizing funded fair starts in life for all kids did more harm to their missions than they did good. 

  • Years and Billions Into Philanthropy and the World is Worse Off. Here’s Why.

    Years and Billions Into Philanthropy and the World is Worse Off. Here’s Why.

    Infographic from Fair Start Movement detailing how funding every child’s right to a fair start benefits children, climate, animals, democracy, and equality—with brief descriptions and relevant icons for each topic—while highlighting the need to avoid practices like legitimacywashing that can undermine genuine progress.
    Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation
  • Nour Belokda Speaks Out

    Nour Belokda Speaks Out

    Nour Belokda works as Fair Start activist in Washington, D.C.

    According to Nour: 

    As a feminist and female lobbyist from the Middle East living in Washington, D.C., I urge our lawmakers to seize the opportunity for our city to become a leader in implementing the United Nations’ standards on gender equality, child development, and climate resilience. D.C. is in a unique position to serve as a model for transformative policies that empower women and enhance the well-being of children.

     

    By linking debt savings accounts to every child’s birth and increasing support for family planning services, we can equip mothers, especially those from marginalized backgrounds, with the resources they need to create nurturing environments. These initiatives not only support emotional and cognitive development but also foster a more equitable society.

     

    The traumatic experience of my brother, who was attacked with acid, highlights the urgent need for comprehensive policies that confront the roots of violence and promote social justice. Such brutal acts often stem from individuals who have been raised without proper guidance and support. As a female lobbyist, I know firsthand the power of legislation to create meaningful change.

     

    By championing policies that protect women’s rights and children’s futures, we can cultivate a culture of empathy and responsibility in our communities. D.C. has the opportunity to embed these UN standards into our legislative framework, ensuring that every child can thrive in a safe and supportive environment. It is essential for our leaders to act decisively and invest in a future marked by equity, compassion, and a collective commitment to social justice for all.

     

    Infographic from Fair Start Movement detailing how funding every child’s right to a fair start benefits children, climate, animals, democracy, and equality—with brief descriptions and relevant icons for each topic—while highlighting the need to avoid practices like legitimacywashing that can undermine genuine progress.

     

     

    Why It Matters? 

    Funding that ensures no child is born beneath a set level of entitlement, consistent with the Children’s Rights Convention and Right to a Healthy Environment, is exponentially the most just and effective way to protect our future and free all of us. The creation of power relations is often the biggest driver of social justice outcomes because it operates on many levels, simultaneously. 

    We can ensure that funding by using the extreme wealth in the world today that was made by not paying the costs of avoiding climate, autocratic and other harms to future generations. The legitimate and reparative standard – being fair – will save millions of lives, and trillions of dollars. 

    However there are entities now funding charities, media, politicians and academics who silo social justice issues away from birth equity, and use omissive messaging – entitlement and impact  fraud – that hides their liability and the entitlement systems ensuring the death of millions as the climate crisis accelerates. As described below Fair Start is urging officials to contrast the claims of beneficial public impact being made by these entities and those they fund with actual harms to women and infants – correctly measured relative to a neutral position rather than the fictitious standards that created the climate and related crises  – as these things accelerate. 

    Fact: When impacts are correctly measured, not prioritizing a measurably fair start in life for all children did exponentially more harm to most stated missions of organizations than those organizations did good. In many cases they will have spent more on lavish travel and events, or other incidentals, than actually furthering their mission. Not first constituting systems of legitimate governance capable of representing constituents by ensuring all kids a threshold of intergenerational justice – the influential equity stake in their democracies that is their first birthright – has condemned millions to do in a climate crisis, while the children of the wealthy families who benefited from the illegitimacy have been enriched.

    Despite the interference, many have already begun to engage in this more effective form of constituting a just future – through language and action – by admitting the failure of systems to date, agreeing to change the way be plan families, and exchanging resources. This transfer of wealth made at deadly costs is also required by law. All law must first be interpreted to assure legitimacy, or the measurable inclusion and empowerment of those subject to it, so that truly representative governance is possible. In other words, the threshold or border, of empowering development, overrides the authority represented by national borders because it is needed to legitimate such law.

     

    Infographic comparing Top Down Power vs. Bottom Up Empowerment for birth equity, listing social impacts of each approach—including potential risks like legitimacywashing when using top-down strategies. Includes icons of people, scales, graduation cap, and supportive hands.

     

    But there are specific barriers blocking this work.

    There are many wealthy families and other concentrations of power in those nations most responsible for the climate crisis who benefitted from unsustainable reproductive rights models. These models used a false premise (that having children is more personal than interpersonal) to avoid the overriding need to ensure measurable empowerment of each citizen, or to first account for our vast generational, racial and other inequitable positionalities in reforming legal systems. 

    This hid the overriding nature of the upstream creation of power relations behind the downstream subject area of population, and conflated a false view of  bodily autonomy, one based on inequity and a capacity to harm others, with true autonomy or measurable self-determination through positioning in one’s democracy.

    The former would enable a woman to terminate her pregnancy only to die months later in a heat wave because she was born with the inherited wealth inequity that comes with being black, could not afford air conditioning, and had little influence over her political system to challenge all of that.  

    Neither business nor government has been historically tasked with defining the ideals of social justice. The wealthy families behind philanthropy generally did that, and by individualizing the idea of reproductive autonomy to isolate women, evade child equity, and ensure unsustainable growth, they created a false reference point for self-determination that triggered a climate crisis killing millions of children of color while enriching their own kids.

    This created a fictitious baseline for cost and benefit analysis and national legitimacy, one that has fundamentally driven the climate crisis by exploiting rather than including and measurable empowering, children as they entered the world. The claims of public benefit that arise from it maintain a fantasy world that enriches mostly white children at deadly cost to millions of children of color. 

    This baseline has subverted the civil rights and anti-apartheid movements by undoing with family inequity upstream the good these families claimed to be doing downstream – a move that exponentially catalyzed the climate and related crises, while aiming the harm of the crises towards the least responsible for it, and most vulnerable to it. If the Three-Fifths Compromise in U.S. history fractionalized the worth of persons of color, the one-tenth and greater illegal disparities in generational wealth that violate legally enforceable children’s rights regimes will now mean the death of millions of children of color in a climate crisis caused primarily by white wealth.

     

    Infographic titled Inequality and the Climate Crisis: How did we get here? with text blocks explaining causes like prioritizing economy over rights, disenfranchisement, ignoring the 1/10th wealth gap, and impacts on families. It also highlights how practices such as legitimacywashing contribute to the problem by masking systemic failures under a veneer of responsibility.

     

    These unsustainable practices and systems ensured children entering under just thresholds, and thus overshoot of ecological carrying capacities, the degradation of those capacities, and the disempowerment of the average person to respond to the ensuing crises. They allowed wealthy white families to amass wealth, at illegal and deadly cost to generations of black families. 

    These wealthy families and other entities are now funding charities, media, politicians and academics who silo social justice issues away from birth equity, and use omissive messaging – a form of entitlement and impact, or equity, fraud –  that hides their liability as well as illegal macro entitlement systems ensuring the death of millions as the climate crisis accelerates. They are obvious because they start by enabling the industries they claim to fight.

    Ensuring Justice for All

    Fair Start is now urging states attorneys generals and other responsible agencies to 1) track the multifaceted impacts of infants entering the world in the U.S. and abroad on their and their mothers’ capacity for self-determination – the highest standard for evaluation, using concrete metrics urged as the zero-baseline form of harm-assessment standardization at the United Nations. 

    We are asking these and other officials to then 2) contrast these impacts with current and historic (ten years back, as a minimum but in many cases with disclosures needed to 2003) sustainability, equity and other public benefit claims, and the use of fundamentally unsustainable and fraudulent family entitlements, used by prominent leaders and organizations within their jurisdictions. This tracking enables preemptive reparations, structured to prevent harm to future generations and to ensure their right to self-determine.

     

    How Do You Destroy a Planet's Atmosphere? Tell Lies. Fair Start Certification Tells the Truth Infographic

     

    Simply put, we are asking officials to assess public benefit impact claims from the accurate baseline for self-determination, relative to real world markers, rather than from the fictitious baseline that assumes black lives are worth less and uses omission to hide white wealth as a driver of the deaths of countless children of color. 

    This fraudulent standard of entitlement, impact, and legitimacy allows many to benefit at deadly cost to others by claiming beneficial public impacts that are actually being undone each day.   

    What are the metrics and moves, exemplified in action here?

    • Funding would-be mothers delay, readiness and safe locating so that no child is born beneath a concrete line of what their rights guarantee them, without abuse or neglect, and what trust-based (democratic) communities require. Read more here.
    • Restoring, not mitigating, climate emissions to natural levels. Read more here. 
    • Taking the exact resources needed to ensure equality of opportunity for children of color, competitive with white kids. Read more here. 
    • Conditioning political and economic authority on their moving towards truly representative ratios between officials and their constituents, and recognizing the need for those in positions of influence to carry the risk of any violence not doing so creates. Read more here.
    •  Benchmarking efficiency to equity measures around the high capacity for humans through equitable development and empowerment, rather than the exploitation that created a climate crisis killing millions of innocents. Read more here. 

    Equity Fraud 

    The failed models have used a fictitious baseline and false premise that hid the upstream antecedent language that entailed the creation of power relations, often behind downstream subjects like population, environment, animal rights, human rights, etc. To constitute, as in national constitutions, means to be obligated. Our debt to children is a chance to actually constitute a just society. This moves from the bottom upwards – governance contingent on the measurable emancipation of youth – not inherently authorized top down.

    The families and concentrations of wealth and power driving the fundamentally unfair systems never really created value, relative to an objective standard like a healthy climate. Instead they first used poor family planning to create their own audiences and artificial demand by treating children as means rather than ends, ensuring dismal standards for child development, education and critical thinking. This slowly converted democratic relations into commercial ones. 

    This violated children’s rights by treating people as economic inputs rather than citizens, and in systems where the average vote was actually being diluted to uselessness, while wealthier families benefited from the appearance of inclusive and functional democracies. A system of fundamental entitlements likely to – through unsustainable growth – kill millions of innocent persons is generally considered a value failure. 

     

    Climate crisis infographic

     

    Activists now with the Fair Start Movement, in prior employment, had to omit facts that would have shown public interest information and interventions being vastly undone by growth and inequity. This was a charade of environmental sustainability and social justice that is still today being vastly undone every day as children enter the world without the resources they need. 

    Under the fraudulent entitlement scheme there are two standards for justice: The real or what should have been, measured at a zero baseline using concrete markers for assessing equity, and self versus other determination. There was also the widely used decoy standard, which centered on assumed legitimacy of white wealth supremacy at birth, and an illusion of bodily autonomy that conflated freedom with the capacity to harm others. 

    Those who use the latter are choosing that the least responsible for the climate crisis suffer its greatest cost, with no justification, increasing climate deaths by millions and costs by trillions. 

    The Fundamental Fix 

    However, the disparity between what we think and say, and the reality of what we do to children and animals relative to objective measures, opens a doorway to legitimacy and freedom. 

    Again, to constitute, as in national constitutions, means to be obligated. Our debt to children is a chance to actually constitute a just society, and from the base, rather than under the standards of those who act as if they are above us. Covering these child development costs as an obligation liberates more than oppresses. 

    But this true control of who has influence over us requires measuring from zero. And that would be impossible without the admission of the specific harm we have caused and the changing of our obligation from those in power instead towards infants and animals. We thus ask all to admit benefit at deadly cost to others, and to back reparations. 

    Where else would liberating / obligatory relations come from? As shown above this “truth and reconciliation” process of removing birth apartheid requires reprioritizing wealth to incentivize and entitle would-be mothers so that no child is born beneath a measurable threshold of self-determination. 

    It is physically impossible to be free, as in self-determining, if we cannot ask and then assure that persons are created, developed and emaciated in ways that offset equally their capacity to influence political systems equally, relative to a neutral position or objective standard for evaluation. Those entering the world are either not empowered, or we all have no choice but to be subjected to their power and influence – including the degradation of the environment around us. We should instead empower the governed, not the government and the wealthy. And it’s very hard to change a future child’s prospects once they are born, so justice should focus on thresholds beneath which children should not be born. 

    Instead of funding those thresholds, those engaged in equity fraud have continued to assume exponential (and very deadly) wealth and resilience disparities are natural – that their and their children’s birthright privileges are just a given – when calculating things like permissible climate emissions.

     

    Urge Peter Singer to Tell the Truth about Animal Liberation, and Save Lives Infographic

     

    Fair Start’s action before the United Nations enables liberation from this nonsense. It simply asks anyone relying on any legal authority to derive back to the most preemptive source of legitimacy, an exercise that inevitably ends with the need to prioritize entitlements that would measurably empower all children through improved birth and development conditions, ensuring them a fair start in life and share equity in democracy. 

    Every entity in the United States should be forced to comply with civil rights laws prohibiting discrimination in hiring, housing, education, etc. But not extending protections to infants who would suffer the consequences of historic injustice – maintaining the separate but equal doctrine there – was a horrific mistake. It seeded in our brains the idea that our birth and developmental positionality was organic, rather than the result of illegitimate policy and that creation was simply art of something humans do rather than a matter of fundamental legitimacy.  

    But it is one that we can fix with universally preemptive standards for fair starts in life. Antiracism requires removing a system of birth entitlements where children of color get a tenth or less of the wealth as white kids, are largely excluded from the political system, and bear the deadly cost of an ecocide they did not create. If those Fair Start engages truly  value the things they took credit for protecting, they will be eager to now cover the costs to others of not having previously included the value in our basic systems of obligation, and to include the things they claim to value as we constitute relations going forward.

    Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation

     

  • Sign On to Fight for a Fair Start in Life for All Kids

    Sign On to Fight for a Fair Start in Life for All Kids

    Fair Start maintains an open letter to the Secretary General of the United Nations requiring him, under law, to publicly back standardization of climate damages to benefit the inants being harmed. Those who believe every child has a right to a fair start in life – and reject the illegitimacy and entitlement fraud described below that ensures zero protection for the most vulnerable – have signed it.

    Sign On Here 

    Funding that ensures no child is born beneath a set level of entitlement, consistent with the Children’s Rights Convention and Right to a Healthy Environment, is exponentially the most just and effective way to protect our future and free all of us. We can ensure that funding by using the extreme wealth in the world today that was made by not paying the costs of avoiding climate, autocratic and other harms to future generations. The legitimate and reparative standard – being fair – will save millions of lives, and trillions of dollars. 

     

    Infographic from Fair Start Movement detailing how funding every child’s right to a fair start benefits children, climate, animals, democracy, and equality—with brief descriptions and relevant icons for each topic—while highlighting the need to avoid practices like legitimacywashing that can undermine genuine progress.

     

    Many have already begun to engage in this more effective form of constituting a just future – through language and action – by admitting the failure of systems to date, agreeing to change the way be lan families, and exchanging resources. 

    This transfer of wealth made at deadly costs is also required by law, through things like the Children’s Rights Convention and under the Right to a Healthy Environment. All law must first be interpreted to assure legitimacy, or the measurable inclusion and empowerment of those subject to it, so that truly representative governance is possible. In other words, the threshold or border, of empowering development, overrides the authority represented by national borders because it is needed to legitimate such law.

    But there are specific barriers blocking this work.

    There are wealthy families and other concentrations of power in those nations most responsible for the climate crisis who benefitted from unsustainable reproductive rights models. These models used a false premise (that having children is more personal than interpersonal) to avoid the overriding need to ensure measurable empowerment of each citizen, or to first account for our vast generational, racial and other inequitable positionalities in reforming legal systems. 

     

    Infographic comparing Top Down Power vs. Bottom Up Empowerment for birth equity, listing social impacts of each approach—including potential risks like legitimacywashing when using top-down strategies. Includes icons of people, scales, graduation cap, and supportive hands.

     

    This subverted the civil rights and anti-apartheid movements by undoing with family inequity upstream the good these families claimed to be doing downstream – a move that exponentially catalyzed the climate and related crises, while aiming the harm of the crises towards the least responsible for it, and most vulnerable to it. If the Three-Fifths Compromise in U.S. history fractionalized the worth of persons of color, the one-tenth and greater illegal disparities in generational wealth that violate legally enforceable children’s rights regimes will now mean the death of millions of children of color in a climate crisis caused primarily by white wealth.

    These unsustainable practices and systems ensured children entering under just thresholds, and thus overshoot of ecological carrying capacities, the degradation of those capacities, and the disempowerment of the average person to respond to the ensuing crises. They allowed wealthy white families to amass wealth, at illegal and deadly cost to generations of black families. 

    These wealthy families and other entities are now funding charities, media, politicians and academics who silo social justice issues away from birth equity, and use omissive messaging – entitlement and impact, or equity, fraud that hides their liability as well as illegal macro entitlement systems ensuring the death of millions as the climate crisis accelerates. They are obvious because they start by enabling the industries they claim to fight.

    Ensuring Justice for All

    Fair Start is now urging states attorneys generals and other responsible agencies to 1) track the multifaceted impacts of infants entering the world in the U.S. and abroad on their and their mothers’ capacity for self-determination – the highest standard for evaluation, using concrete metrics urged as the zero-baseline form of harm-assessment standardization at the United Nations. 

    What are the metrics and moves, exemplified in action here?

    • Funding would-be mothers delay, readiness and safe locating so that no child is born beneath a concrete line of what their rights guarantee them, without abuse or neglect, and what trust-based (democratic) communities require. Read more here.
    • Restoring, not mitigating, climate emissions to natural levels. Read more here. 
    • Taking the exact resources needed to ensure equality of opportunity for children of color, competitive with white kids. Read more here. 
    • Conditioning political and economic authority on their moving towards truly representative ratios between officials and their constituents, and recognizing the need for those in positions of influence to carry the risk of any violence not doing so creates. Read more here.
    •  Benchmarking efficiency to equity measures that would not have created a climate crisis killing millions of innocents. Read more here. 

     

    We are asking these and other officials to then 2) contrast these impacts with current and historic (ten years back, as a minimum) sustainability and equity claims, and the use of fundamentally unsustainable and fraudulent family entitlements, used by prominent leaders and organizations within their jurisdictions. This tracking enables preemptive reparations, structured to prevent harm to future generations and to ensure their right to self-determine. 

     

    Infographic titled Inequality and the Climate Crisis: How did we get here? with text blocks explaining causes like prioritizing economy over rights, disenfranchisement, ignoring the 1/10th wealth gap, and impacts on families. It also highlights how practices such as legitimacywashing contribute to the problem by masking systemic failures under a veneer of responsibility.

     

    The failed models used a fictitious baseline and false premise that hid the upstream antecedent language that entailed the creation of power relations, often behind downstream subjects like population, environment, animal rights, human rights, etc. To constitute, as in national constitutions, means to be obligated. Our debt to children is a chance to actually constitute a just society. This moves from the bottom upwards – governance contingent on in emancipation of youth – not inherently authorized top down . 

    The families and concentrations of wealth and power driving the fundamentally unfair systems never really created value, relative to an objective standard like a healthy climate. Instead they first used poor family planning to create their own audiences and artificial demand by treating children as means rather than ends, ensuring dismal standards for child development, education and critical thinking. This slowly converted democratic relations into commercial ones. 

    This violated children’s rights by treating people as economic inputs rather than citizens, and in systems where the average vote was actually being diluted to uselessness, while wealthier families benefited from the appearance of inclusive and functional democracies. A system of fundamental entitlements likely to – through unsustainable growth – kill millions of innocent persons is generally considered a value failure. 

    Activists now with the Fair Start Movement, in prior employment, had to omit facts that would have shown public interest information and interventions being vastly undone by growth and inequity. This was a charade of environmental sustainability and social justice that is still today being vastly undone every day as children enter the world without the resources they need. 

    Under the fraudulent entitlement scheme there are two standards for justice: The real or what should have been, measured at a zero baseline using concrete markers for assessing equity, and self versus other determination. There was also the widely used decoy standard, which centered on assumed legitimacy of white wealth supremacy at birth, and an illusion of bodily autonomy that conflated freedom with the capacity to harm others. 

    Those who use the latter are choosing that the least responsible for the climate crisis suffer its greatest cost, with no justification, increasing climate deaths by millions and costs by trillions. 

     

    Two illustrations compare family planning models: At left, a diverse happy family stands together with icons for community and health. At right, a monochrome crowd in a city. Text contrasts fair start (rights-based) with economic growth-based planning.

     

    The Fundamental Fix 

    However, the disparity between what we think and say, and the reality of what we do to children and animals relative to objective measures, opens a doorway to legitimacy and freedom. 

    Again, to constitute, as in national constitutions, means to be obligated. Our debt to children is a chance to actually constitute a just society, and from the base, rather than under the standards of those who act as if they are above us. Covering these child development costs as an obligation liberates more than oppresses. 

    But this true control of who has influence over us requires measuring from zero. And that would be impossible without the admission of the specific harm we have caused and the changing of our obligation from those in power instead towards infants and animals. We thus ask all to admit benefit at deadly cost to others, and to back reparations. 

    Where else would liberating / obligatory relations come from? As shown above this “truth and reconciliation” process of removing birth apartheid requires reprioritizing wealth to incentivize and entitle would-be mothers so that no child is born beneath a measurable threshold of self-determination. 

    It is physically impossible to be free, as in self-determining, if persons are not created, developed and emaciated in ways that offset equally their capacity to influence political systems equally, relative to a neutral position or objective standard for evaluation.  And it’s very hard to change a future child’s prospects once they are born, so justice focuses on thresholds beneath which children should not be born. 

    Instead of funding those thresholds, those engaged in equity fraud have continued to assume exponential (and very deadly) wealth and resilience disparities are natural – that their and their children’s birthright privileges are just a given – when calculating things like permissible climate emissions.

     

    Don't Get Scammed: Charities, Media and Big Business Use Family Policy to Quietly Undo Progress. Ask This One Question Before Giving, Believing, or Buying Infographic

     

    Fair Start’s action before the United Nations enables liberation from this nonsense. It simply asks anyone relying on any legal authority to derive back to the most preemptive source of legitimacy, an exercise that inevitably ends with the need to prioritize entitlements that would measurably empower all children through improved birth and development conditions, ensuring them a fair start in life and share equity in democracy. 

    Every entity in the United States should be forced to comply with civil rights laws prohibiting discrimination in hiring, housing, education, etc. But not extending protections to infants who would suffer the consequences of historic injustice – maintaining the separate but equal doctrine there – was a horrific mistake. It seeded in our brains the idea that our birth and developmental positionality was organic, rather than the result of illegitimate policy and that creation was simply art of something humans do rather than a matter of fundamental legitimacy.  

    But it is one that we can fix with universally preemptive standards for fair starts in life. Antiracism requires removing a system of birth entitlements where children of color get a tenth or less of the wealth as white kids, are largely excluded from the political system, and bear the deadly cost of an ecocide they did not create.

    Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation

  • Fairness Fridays Make Meatless Mondays Taste Better.

    Fairness Fridays Make Meatless Mondays Taste Better.

    Meatless Mondays, the brainchild of Sid Lerner, have been a big hit:

    “Inspired by the meat reduction campaigns of World War I and II, Sid conceived of and launched Meatless Monday with the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in 2003. The simple concept of “cutting out meat one day per week” was clear, memorable, and easy to understand and encouraged participants to take small steps towards lifestyle changes. Meatless Monday materials, resources, and programming were made free to the public and could be easily customized for any organization, community or individual.”

     

    Those involved in the Fair Start Movement assisted charities funded by Lerner and his family to promote dietary change as a way to benefit animals, the environment, and human health. 

     

    Infographic comparing Top Down Power vs. Bottom Up Empowerment for birth equity, listing social impacts of each approach—including potential risks like legitimacywashing when using top-down strategies. Includes icons of people, scales, graduation cap, and supportive hands.

     

    The problem: Upstream inequitable family policies, which are used to enable unsustainable growth, have done more harm to human health and animal rights than downstream efforts like dietary reforms have done good.   

    Matless Mondays are great, but if we want a better future, they have to be combined with Fairness Fridays.

    What’s that? Fairness Fridays is a commitment to give an hour, one day a week, to backing Fair Start universal equity reforms that move wealth made from unsustainable and inequitable growth into the hands of would-be parents to maximize equity in future generations:

    There are dozens of ways to take action on your Fairness Friday. 

    Funding that ensures no child is born beneath a set level of entitlement, consistent with the Children’s Rights Convention and Right to a Healthy Environment, is exponentially the most just and effective way to protect and free all of us. It is also required by law, in things like the Children’s Rights Convention and under the Right to a Healthy Environment.

    But there are specific barriers blocking this work. Wealthy families and other concentrations of wealth and power in those nations most responsible for the climate crisis are now funding charities, media, politicians and academics who silo social justice issues away from birth equity, and use omissive messaging that hides macro entitlement systems ensuring the death of millions as the climate crisis accelerates. 

     

    How Do You Destroy a Planet's Atmosphere? Tell Lies. Fair Start Certification Tells the Truth Infographic

     

    The disparity between what we think and say, and the reality of what we do to children and animals relative to objective measures, opens a doorway to legitimacy and freedom. 

    To constitute, as in national constitutions, means to be obligated. Our debt to children is a chance to actually constitute a just society, and from the base rather than under the standards of those who act as if they are above us. But this requires, and would be impossible without, the  admission of the specific harm we have caused and linguistically inverting our obligation from those in power towards infants and animals. Where else would liberating / obligatory relations come from? This requires reprioritizing wealth to incentivize and entitle would-be mothers so that no child is born beneath a measurable threshold of self-determination. 

    Fair Start is now urging states attorneys generals and other responsible agencies to track the multifaceted impacts of infants entering the world on their capacity for self-determination – the highest standard for evaluation, using the eight concrete metrics urged as the zero-baseline form of harm-assessment standardization at the United Nations. We are asking these and other officials to contrast these impacts on the most vulnerable and numerous entities, with current historic sustainability and equity claims, and the use of fundamentally unsustainable standards, used by prominent leaders and organizations. 

    Background: Hidden and deadly racism 

    The climate and related crises we face today were largely driven by the absence of any child equity and empowerment standards in near-universal reproductive and human rights regimes dating back to 1948. 

    The wealthy families and governments driving these regimes were avoiding measurable democratic equity as the overriding value behind political legitimacy, and evading its ability to override existing entitlements. But by avoiding equity, they seeded racist inequity,  unsustainable growth that would trigger the climate crisis, and the development of fundamentally illegitimate political systems that never measurably empowered their subjects enough to gain representative capacity and authority.

    These families have historically subverted civil rights by undoing with family inequity upstream the good they claim to be doing downstream – a move that exponentially catalyzed the climate and related crises, while aiming the harm of the crises towards the least responsible for it, and most vulnerable to it. If the Three-Fifths Compromise made fractionalized the worth of persons of color, one-tenth and greater illegal disparities in generational wealth, disparities that violated legally enforceable children’s rights regimes, will now mean the death of millions of children of color in a climate crisis caused primarily by white wealth.

    By isolating women in the family planning process and ignoring child equity, wealthy families have for decades ensured inherited poverty, or commercially exploitative rather than legitimate and inclusive relations. Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “What does it profit a man to be able to eat at an integrated lunch counter if he doesn’t earn enough money to buy a hamburger and a cup of coffee?” That condition derived fundamentally from the use of illegal family entitlements that undermined all civil rights and created a generational apartheid that Fair Start and others is now dismantling with women’s networks in the United States and Europe engaged in reparations recovery and preemptive self-defense.

     

    Two panels compare family planning types. Left: diverse family illustration with bright colors, labeled Fair Start family planning with positive points. Right: grayscale crowd in a city, labeled Economic growth-based family planning with negative points.

     

    Fundamental illegitimacy 

    This created a fake, top-down version of social justice based on hollow legal institutions and laws that never derived from any legitimating authority, but rather hid the actual creation of power relations in birth, development, and emancipation. It allowed wealthy white families to amass wealth, at illegal and deadly cost to generations of black families. Under this scheme there were two standards for justice: The real – measured at a zero baseline using concrete markers for assessing self versus other determination, and the decoy – which centered on an illusion of bodily autonomy, one conflated with the capacity to harm others.

    If after 1948 national legitimacy and authority were contingent on inverting the flow of authority from government to the governed, this move represents the height of colonization because it assumed claims to authority wealth that should instead have gone through a process of familial legitimation. Not doing so cannibalized freedom, taking from us what we are owed in democracy and trying to sell it back in commerce. The difference between self-determination relative to zero baseline markers, and exploitation, is what these families owe in reparations. Without fair starts in life, there is no capacity to form organizations of persons capable of representative governance, via the measurable self-determination of its constituents. Family planning reparations enable this process, and given that wealth was already  taken and the benefits already consumed, it is owed as share equity (equal offsets of influence relative to zero) for each child.

    Wealthy families and other concentrations of wealth and power in those nations most responsible for the climate crisis are now funding a fantasy world of charities, media, academics, etc. who use omissive messaging to evade the liability they and their children carry from inequitable growth. They frame what is obligatory as charity. They use decoy versions of public interest work – by organizations, academics, media, etc. – the impacts of which are being exponentially undone, each day, by family policies that enrich mostly white families at deadly cost to countless children of color. This involves literally using wealth made at cost to their stated missions to drown out the voices of the vulnerable, who could actually accomplish the mission through more fundamental reforms.

     

    Train tracks with the world "one hospitable biosphere" with a cartoon man "2700 billionaires"

     

    There is no legitimacy authority or entitlements without the measurable political equity, or entitling children enough so they offset each other’s influence relative to a neutral position – testable through things like the feasibility of a constitutional convention. Instead, the model urged by these families assures zero functional protections for infants and animals, and uses a sleight of hand that conceives of freedom in terms of an arbitrary form of autonomy from the state, rather than as political equity to choose who has influence over you, ecologically and socially. 

    Here are questions for anyone claiming to do good in the world today: How can we assure justice without improving the conditions in which children are born and develop, given the intergenerational justice requirements of minimum thresholds for all children? How do we become free without honoring the rights of others, especially the future majority? If you value some outcome, who will cover the child inequity and entry costs to that outcome – growth undoing climate mitigation, for example – and evade more of it? Is the entity doing more harm than good by ignoring entry without equity? What formula do they use to assess damages in climate, civil rights, environmental justice, etc. cases? How do they define the term power in the context of being free from power? Who is their intended audience?

    The families and concentrations of wealth and power driving the fundamentally unfair systems have never created value, relative to an objective standard like a healthy climate. Instead they first used poor family planning to create their own audiences and artificial demand by ensuring dismal standards for child development and education, violating children’s rights and treating people as economic inputs rather than citizens while benefiting from the appearance of inclusive and functional democracies where the average vote was actually being diluted to uselessness. A system of fundamental entitlements likely to kill millions of innocent persons is generally considered a failure.

    Activists now with the Fair Start Movement, in prior employment, had to omit facts that would have shown public interest information and interventions being vastly undone by growth and inequity. This was a charade of environmental sustainability and social justice that is still today being vastly undone every day as children enter the world without the resources they need. These families routinely funded decoy nonprofits that silo social justice into various downstream issues in order to hide upstream entitlement and reparations fraud, using a false premise to benefit from a system that undoes the good they seem to do. This does more to benefit the rich, white children of the funders backing their programs, and at deadly cost to countless children of color, than it does to accomplish the missions.

    Taking action 

    As discussed above, Fair Start is now urging states attorneys generals and other responsible agencies to track the multifaceted impacts of infants entering the world on their capacity for self-determination – the highest standard for evaluation, using the eight concrete metrics urged as the zero-baseline form of harm-assessment standardization at the United Nations. We are asking these and other officials to contrast these impacts on the most vulnerable and numerous entities, with fraudulent sustainability and equity claims, and the use of fundamentally unsustainable standards, used by prominent leaders and organizations.

    The disparity between what we think and say, and the reality of what we do to children and animals relative to objective measures, opens a doorway to legitimacy and freedom.

    To constitute, as in national constitutions, means to be obligated. Our debt to children is a chance to actually constitute a just society, and from the base rather than under the standards of those who act as if they are above us. But this requires, and would be impossible without, the  admission of the specific harm we have caused and linguistically inverting our obligation from those in power towards infants and animals. Where else would liberating / obligatory relations come from? This requires reprioritizing wealth to incentivize and entitle would-be mothers so that no child is born beneath a measurable threshold of self-determination.

     

    An Open Letter to ReproAction and the Center for Reproductive Rights: Abortion Rights Can Override Governmental Authority

     

    National legitimacy derives from and is contingent upon including in a measurable way subjects as free and equal constituents, so that they have the capacity to choose who has influence over them, and legal institutions have the capacity to represent its constituents. Reorienting from being obligated top-down to empowering from the bottom-up also holds promise to reduce violence by rejecting any legitimate representative authority of the state to use it to block reparations, or to otherwise role model illegitimate violence those around us.

    There is now an action before the United Nations that redefines what it means to constitute a just nation where subjects are empowered enough in the creation of actual relations, through birth, development and emancipation, to move from being treated as subjects to being included as constituents, and obligated to follow laws only because they have the measurable capacity to control the legal system. Those who do not back ensuring all children a fair start in life logically fall outside of any system of collective obligation, and protection.

    The action before the UN seeks to escalate climate and other reparations – specifically designed as family planning entitlements – by trillions of dollars, through the concept of equity fraud, in order to save millions of lives. Many are using illegal tactics to block the high valuation because this work goes beyond targeting greenwashing towards finding the concealment of liability for the death – through a sustainability scam involving both false and omissive claims (with the most falsifiable claims made in the animal rights sector) – of millions in the escalating climate crisis.

    Every entity in the United States should be forced to comply with civil rights laws prohibiting discrimination in hiring, housing, education, etc. But not extending protections to infants who would suffer the consequences of historic injustice – maintaining the separate but equal doctrine there – was a horrific mistake. It seeded in our brains the idea that our birth and developmental positionality was organic, rather than the result of illegitimate policy.  But it is one that we can fix with universally preemptive standards for fair starts in life. Antiracism requires removing a system of birth entitlements where children of color get a tenth or less of the wealth as white kids, are largely excluded from the political system, and bear the deadly cost of an ecocide they did not create.

    Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation

  • Factchecking the Weeden Foundation.

    Factchecking the Weeden Foundation.

    Funding that ensures no child is born beneath a set level of entitlement, consistent with the Children’s Rights Convention and Right to a Healthy Environment, is exponentially the most just and effective way to protect our future and free all of us. We can do it using the extreme wealth in the world today that was made by not paying the costs of avoiding harm to future generations. 

    This transfer is also required by law, in things like the Children’s Rights Convention and under the Right to a Healthy Environment. All law must first be interpreted to assure legitimacy, or the measurable inclusion and empowerment of those subject to it, so that truly representative government is possible.   

    But there are specific barriers blocking this work.

    There are wealthy families and other concentrations of power in those nations most responsible for the climate crisis who benefitted from unsustainable reproductive rights models. These models used a false premise (that having children is more personal than interpersonal) to avoid the overriding need to ensure measurable empowerment of each citizen, or to first account for our generational, racial and other positionalities in reforming legal systems. 

    This subverted the civil rights and anti-apartheid movements by undoing with family inequity upstream the good they claim to be doing downstream – a move that exponentially catalyzed the climate and related crises, while aiming the harm of the crises towards the least responsible for it, and most vulnerable to it. If the Three-Fifths Compromise made fractionalized the worth of persons of color, one-tenth and greater illegal disparities in generational wealth, disparities that violated legally enforceable children’s rights regimes, will now mean the death of millions of children of color in a climate crisis caused primarily by white wealth.

    These unsustainable models and systems ensured the overshoot of ecological carrying capacities, the degradation of those capacities, and the disempowerment of the average person to respond to the ensuing crises. The models allowed wealthy white families to amass wealth, at illegal and deadly cost to generations of black families. These wealthy families and other entities are now funding charities, media, politicians and academics who silo social justice issues away from birth equity, and use omissive messaging that hides their liability, and illegal macro entitlement systems ensuring the death of millions as the climate crisis accelerates.

     

    Infographic comparing Top Down Power vs. Bottom Up Empowerment for birth equity, listing social impacts of each approach—including potential risks like legitimacywashing when using top-down strategies. Includes icons of people, scales, graduation cap, and supportive hands.

     

    • The Weeden Foundation claims: “The Foundation embraces the protection of biodiversity as its overarching priority. Frank Weeden, the Foundation’s founder and original benefactor, established the Weeden Foundation to address the impact of growing human populations and overuse of natural resources on the biological fabric of the planet.”

     

     

    • Fact: The Weeden family and Foundation do not treat equity as a fundamental value in their work. Under their model the least responsible for the crises we face today suffer the greatest cost.

     

    • Not prioritizing reforms that measurably ensure a fair start in life for all children has done exponentially more harm to biodiversity – given the role of entitlements in the climate crisis –  than the Weeden Foundation has done to protect it. Even if other forces, like the church, had blocked equity in negotiating international regimes it was incumbent on leaders not to relinquish it as a goal. They did. 

     

    • First constituting a legitimate entitlement system, by ensuring all kids a threshold of intergenerational justice that includes an influential equity stake in their democracies as their first birthright, is first and necessary condition for justice. Instead, under the status quo, nations use a narrow view of autonomy to enable a woman to terminate her pregnancy only to die months later in a heat wave because she was born black and hence with a fraction of the average wealth, could not afford air conditioning, and had little influence over her political system. By dividing bodily autonomy from political equity, and our generational and other positionalities, governments are killing millions.

     

    • The alternative would be for free persons to condition any obligation to follow the law on being empowered. How can states entitle anyone’s wealth, or claim authority to use coercion to defend entitlements, without first including and empowering their constituents.

     

    Infographic from Fair Start Movement detailing how funding every child’s right to a fair start benefits children, climate, animals, democracy, and equality—with brief descriptions and relevant icons for each topic—while highlighting the need to avoid practices like legitimacywashing that can undermine genuine progress.

     

     

     

    Ensuring Justice for All

    Fair Start is now urging states attorneys generals and other responsible agencies to 1) track the multifaceted impacts of infants entering the world in the U.S. and abroad on their and their mothers’ capacity for self-determination – the highest standard for evaluation, using the eight concrete metrics urged as the zero-baseline form of harm-assessment standardization at the United Nations. We are asking these and other officials to then 2) contrast these impacts with current and historic (ten years back, as a minimum) sustainability and equity claims, and the use of fundamentally unsustainable and fraudulent family entitlements used by prominent leaders and organizations within their jurisdictions. This tracking enables  preemptive reparations, structured to prevent harm to future generations and their right to self-determine. 

    Under this entitlement scheme there are two standards for justice: The real or what should have been, measured at a zero baseline using concrete markers for assessing equity, and self versus other determination. There was also a widely used decoy standard, which centered on assumed legitimacy of white wealth supremacy at birth, and an illusion of bodily autonomy that conflated freedom with the capacity to harm others.

    Those who use the latter are choosing that the least responsible for the climate crisis suffer its greatest cost, with no justification.

    This is a fair question: Are concentrations of wealth, like the Weeden Foundation and other assets held by the family, now partially subject to climate reparations claims? Do they owed enough funds to be used to reform the fundamental reproductive rights models and compensate victims? Will Donald, the foundation and the family back reforms that will offset their benefits, consistent with their stated values?

    Donald Weeden’s life is worth no more than the lives of children who will otherwise die in a crisis without a change in incentive structures, and abandonment of models derived from fallacies that benefited Donald and his family.

    Donald should admit birth inequity did more harm than he did good, and any role he had in promoting the idea of biodiversity that would be undone upstream by not ensuring infants measurable capacity for self-determination. If he truly valued things like biodiversity he would be eager to cover the costs of not having previously included the value in our basic systems of obligation, and to include the value going forward.

     

    Infographic titled Inequality and the Climate Crisis: How did we get here? with text blocks explaining causes like prioritizing economy over rights, disenfranchisement, ignoring the 1/10th wealth gap, and impacts on families. It also highlights how practices such as legitimacywashing contribute to the problem by masking systemic failures under a veneer of responsibility.

     

    Background: Hidden and deadly racism 

    The climate and related crises we face today were largely driven by the absence of any child equity and empowerment standards in near-universal reproductive and human rights regimes dating back to 1948. 

    The wealthy families and governments driving these regimes were avoiding measurable democratic equity as the overriding value behind political legitimacy, and evading its ability to override existing entitlements. But by avoiding equity, they seeded racist inequity,  unsustainable growth that would trigger the climate crisis, and the development of fundamentally illegitimate political systems that never measurably empowered their subjects enough to gain representative capacity and authority. 

    These families have historically subverted civil rights and anti-apartheid movements by undoing with family inequity upstream the good they claim to be doing downstream – a move that exponentially catalyzed the climate and related crises, while aiming the harm of the crises towards the least responsible for it, and most vulnerable to it. If the Three-Fifths Compromise made fractionalized the worth of persons of color, one-tenth and greater illegal disparities in generational wealth, disparities that violated legally enforceable children’s rights regimes, will now mean the death of millions of children of color in a climate crisis caused primarily by white wealth.

    By isolating women in the family planning process and ignoring child equity, wealthy families have for decades ensured inherited poverty, or commercially exploitative rather than legitimate and inclusive relations. “The real trouble with eugenics is not that it can be coercive; it is that the state can use it
    to create the citizens it wants to govern.” If we look beyond individuals and towards the nature of our relations, how is the ubiquity of economic pronatalism in the face of the climate crisis not evidence of this occurring? 

    Martin Luther King, Jr. said, “What does it profit a man to be able to eat at an integrated lunch counter if he doesn’t earn enough money to buy a hamburger and a cup of coffee?” That condition derived fundamentally from the use of illegal family entitlements that undermined all civil rights and created a generational apartheid that Fair Start and others is now dismantling with women’s networks in the United States and Europe engaged in reparations recovery and preemptive self-defense.

     

    Two panels compare family planning types. Left: diverse family illustration with bright colors, labeled Fair Start family planning with positive points. Right: grayscale crowd in a city, labeled Economic growth-based family planning with negative points.

     

    Fundamental illegitimacy 

    As discussed above this created a fake, top-down version of social justice based on hollow legal institutions and laws that never derived from any legitimating authority, but rather hid the actual creation of power relations in birth, development, and emancipation. They did so by using a narrow conception of reproductive autonomy to fundamentally cloud our conception freedom, and our ability to differentiate between self versus other determination.

    If after 1948 national legitimacy and authority were contingent on inverting the flow of authority from government to the governed, this move represents the height of colonization because it assumed claims to authority wealth that should instead have gone through a process of familial legitimation. Not doing so cannibalized freedom, taking from us what we are owed in democracy and trying to sell it back in commerce. The difference between self-determination relative to zero baseline markers, and exploitation, is what these families owe in reparations. Without fair starts in life, there is no capacity to form organizations of persons capable of representative governance, via the measurable self-determination of its constituents. Family planning reparations enable this process, and given that wealth was already  taken and the benefits already consumed, it is owed as share equity (equal offsets of influence relative to zero) for each child.

    Wealthy families and other concentrations of wealth and power in those nations most responsible for the climate crisis are now funding a fantasy world of charities, media, academics, etc. who use omissive messaging to evade the liability they and their children carry from inequitable growth. They frame what is obligatory as charity. They use decoy versions of public interest work – by organizations, academics, media, etc. – the impacts of which are being exponentially undone, each day, by family policies that enrich mostly white families at deadly cost to countless children of color. This involves literally using wealth made at cost to their stated missions to drown out the voices of the vulnerable, who could actually accomplish the mission through more fundamental reforms. 

     

    Don't Get Scammed: Charities, Media and Big Business Use Family Policy to Quietly Undo Progress. Ask This One Question Before Giving, Believing, or Buying Infographic

     

    There is no legitimacy authority or entitlements without the measurable political equity, or entitling children enough so they offset each other’s influence relative to a neutral position – testable through things like the feasibility of a constitutional convention. Instead, the model urged by these families assures zero functional protections for infants and animals, and uses a sleight of hand that conceives of freedom in terms of an arbitrary form of autonomy from the state, rather than as political equity to choose who has influence over you, ecologically and socially. 

    Here are questions for anyone claiming to do good in the world today: How can we assure justice without improving the conditions in which children are born and develop, given the intergenerational justice requirements of minimum thresholds for all children? How do we become free without honoring the rights of others, especially the future majority? If you value some outcome, who will cover the child inequity and entry costs to that outcome – growth undoing climate mitigation, for example – and evade more of it? Is the entity doing more harm than good by ignoring entry without equity? What formula do they use to assess damages in climate, civil rights, environmental justice, etc. cases? How do they define the term power in the context of being free from power? Who is their intended audience?  

    The families and concentrations of wealth and power driving the fundamentally unfair systems have never created value, relative to an objective standard like a healthy climate. Instead they first used poor family planning to create their own audiences and artificial demand by treating children as means rather than ends, ensuring dismal standards for child development and education, violating children’s rights and treating people as economic inputs rather than citizens while benefiting from the appearance of inclusive and functional democracies where the average vote was actually being diluted to uselessness. A system of fundamental entitlements likely to kill millions of innocent persons is generally considered a failure. 

    Activists now with the Fair Start Movement, in prior employment, had to omit facts that would have shown public interest information and interventions being vastly undone by growth and inequity. This was a charade of environmental sustainability and social justice that is still today being vastly undone every day as children enter the world without the resources they need. These families routinely funded decoy nonprofits that silo social justice into various downstream issues in order to hide upstream entitlement and reparations fraud, using a false premise to benefit from a system that undoes the good they seem to do. This does more to benefit the rich, white children of the funders backing their programs, and at deadly cost to countless children of color, than it does to accomplish the missions.

    Taking action 

    As discussed above, Fair Start is now urging states attorneys generals and other responsible agencies to track the multifaceted impacts of infants entering the world on their capacity for self-determination – the highest standard for evaluation, using the eight concrete metrics urged as the zero-baseline form of harm-assessment standardization at the United Nations. We are asking these and other officials to contrast these impacts on the most vulnerable and numerous entities, with fraudulent sustainability and equity claims, and the use of fundamentally unsustainable standards, used by prominent leaders and organizations.

    The disparity between what we think and say, and the reality of what we do to children and animals relative to objective measures, opens a doorway to legitimacy and freedom. 

    To constitute, as in national constitutions, means to be obligated. Our debt to children is a chance to actually constitute a just society, and from the base rather than under the standards of those who act as if they are above us. Covering these costs as an obligation, before taxes, liberates more than oppresses. But this requires, and would be impossible without, the admission of the specific harm we have caused and the linguistic inversion of our obligation from those in power instead towards infants and animals. Where else would liberating / obligatory relations come from? This requires reprioritizing wealth to incentivize and entitle would-be mothers so that no child is born beneath a measurable threshold of self-determination. 

     

    An Open Letter to ReproAction and the Center for Reproductive Rights: Abortion Rights Can Override Governmental Authority

     

    National legitimacy derives from and is contingent upon including in a measurable way subjects as free and equal constituents, so that they have the capacity to choose who has influence over them, and legal institutions have the capacity to represent its constituents. Reorienting from being obligated top-down to empowering from the bottom-up also holds promise to reduce violence by rejecting any legitimate representative authority of the state to use it to block reparations, or to otherwise role model illegitimate violence those around us. If we never treated others as ends in a political system, such that their influence offsets equally, why do they owe us duties, to respect our lives, for example? 

    There is now an action before the United Nations that redefines what it means to constitute a just nation where subjects are empowered enough in the creation of actual relations, through birth, development and emancipation, to move from being treated as subjects to being included as constituents, and obligated to follow laws only because they have the measurable capacity to control the legal system. Those who do not back ensuring all children a fair start in life logically fall outside of any system of collective obligation, and protection. 

    The action before the UN seeks to escalate climate and other reparations – specifically designed as family planning entitlements – by trillions of dollars, through the concept of equity fraud, in order to save millions of lives. Many are using illegal tactics to block the high valuation. 

    But the UN work goes beyond targeting greenwashing towards finding the concealment of liability for the death – through a sustainability scam involving both false and omissive claims – of millions in the escalating climate crisis. Some of the most falsifiable claims were made in the animal rights sector, in a #demandscam where charities focused on vegan food reforms that benefitted their funders, knowing full well that growth was undoing the benefits for animals.

    By revealing the truth, Fair Start reforms become an evolution of animal rights towards a more macro level: If we can’t steal abused animals because animals are not property, if in fact we  are only saving them, then we also can’t reduce them to property in human reproductive rights regimes that ignore their rights, and do not treat children well enough so that they would be inclined to treat animals well. 

    The base, not an option

    Every entity in the United States should be forced to comply with civil rights laws prohibiting discrimination in hiring, housing, education, etc. But not extending protections to infants who would suffer the consequences of historic injustice – maintaining the separate but equal doctrine there – was a horrific mistake. It seeded in our brains the idea that our birth and developmental positionality was organic, rather than the result of illegitimate policy.  But the mistake is one that we can fix with universally preemptive standards for fair starts in life.

    Antiracism requires removing a system of birth entitlements where children of color get a tenth or less of the wealth as white kids, are largely excluded from the political system, and bear the deadly cost of an ecocide they did not create. Thresholds of protection for birth, development and emancipation enable a permanent resistance to oppression by linking the measurable needs of the most vulnerable to our own liberation.

    Fair Start’s action before the United Nations enables this liberation. It simply asks anyone relying on any legal authority to derive back to the most preemptive source of legitimacy, an exercise that inevitably ends with the need to prioritize entitlements that would measurably empower all children through improved birth and development conditions, ensuring them a fair start in life and share equity in democracy. 

    Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation

  • The Biggest Threat to You Today? The Best Solution?

    The Biggest Threat to You Today? The Best Solution?

    Problem:

    The human and reproductive rights regimes instituted in 1948 included no minimum and concretely measurable standards of welfare, equity, or freedom for future children, a mistake that ensured vast inequality and growth leading to the climate and other crises we see today. Reproductive autonomy centered on self-determination, but only for parents, not children and the communities they would impact and comprise.

     

    Infographic comparing Top Down Power vs. Bottom Up Empowerment for birth equity, listing social impacts of each approach—including potential risks like legitimacywashing when using top-down strategies. Includes icons of people, scales, graduation cap, and supportive hands.

     

    Not ensuring child equity involved assuming a contradictory premise – non-empowerment – for the legitimacy of government. This made social justice interventions largely performative – not tied to the creation at birth of actual power relations. Good evidence of this involves projected death rates in the climate crisis.

    This extended a form of historic reparations fraud that undercut the civil rights movement and resulted in the exploiting of positionality and future children for growth rather than including and empowering each child. The mistake – conflating the zeroing out of entitlements to ensure self-determination and equity, instead with some detached notion of bodily autonomy – is now undoing much of the good philanthropy has done to date. This fact is evident if we assess beneficial impact claims against the impacts of children entering the world, relative to children’s rights standards, on the day the claims are made.

     

    An Open Letter to ReproAction and the Center for Reproductive Rights: Abortion Rights Can Override Governmental Authority

     

    Solution:

    Fair Start is instituting a preemptive human right to a fair start in life, using children’s rights standards, to supplant the current inequitable and unsustainable human and reproductive rights regimes. We are using those standards, and zero baseline accounting around accepted standards of intergenerational justice, to assess climate reparations as family planning entitlements, inverse to wealth. The entitlements encourage collective family planning, parenting delay, readiness, and equity.

     

    How Do You Destroy a Planet's Atmosphere? Tell Lies. Fair Start Certification Tells the Truth Infographic

     

    Because the legitimacy and authority of governance derives from its subjects, such a preemptive right is already inherent and practicable, and Fair Start is moving at the linguistic (with truth and reconciliation admissions), legal (e.g., preempting all damage assessment impact child welfare matters), organizational (via certification) and grassroots levels (via women’s defense collectives) to secure reparations for the accounting to assure no child is born beneath a line of minimum standards of welfare, equity, or freedom.

    That line is the border between power and freedom that precedes national borders on map. Children deserve the self-determination or freedom that is required for legitimate governance – persons positioned to organize and free and equals, not the reparations scam that cause the crisis. We are all obligated to first constitute, not to any constitution that is merely derivative and conditional.