Fair Start Movement

Category: Responsible Parenting & Smaller Families

Two Reasons Freedom Loving Americans Will Target Concentrations of Wealth and Power to Pay Their Share of Ensuring a Fair Start in Life for All Kids.

Reason One: Extreme concentrations of wealth and power were made at cost to your, and your kids’, freedom – as well as our national security.

How? That money was made mostly through unsustainable growth policies that filled the world with dangerous people in order to make money on them, people who came from dysfunctional homes and never got what they needed growing up because we never had to assure their rights as children. More people, who did not trust one another, meant bigger government and less of a say for each.

Those at the top could back policies that made a lot of people, and made money off then, because they never had to invest children’s rights and empowering birth and development conditions. They were making consumers, workers, and taxpayers for Amazon, Inc. and the politicians they bought, not citizens who trust each other – for town halls and main street.

A nation is not some abstract idea – it is first and foremost the quantity and quality of those in it. And free people will only follow laws in systems in which they were empowered with political control, with a meaningful voice in making the laws. Many disregard the authority of politicians for the same good reason they disregard the authority of bosses in large companies – because those at the top represent so many, and with such different interests, they do not and cannot really represent you.

Why is your right to bear arms – your freedom to own a gun – threatened? Mass shootings mean the average American cannot be trusted with guns. Where did these shooters come from? If you cant trust those around you with guns why would you trust them with your democracy?

Why does the average American have a vote that is pretty much worthless, diluted by growth? Why is your access to places like national parks so regulated and threatened, as you wait hours in line? Where does immigration originate from?

If we can do these things, we can be a people with a certain idea of America, of certain unalienable rights, to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle us. But we cannot be a nation, conceived in liberty, without a land in which nature thrives.

Laws of Nature, Not a State of Nature – American Greatness.

Those at the border do not fall from the sky – and the best research treats growth as the key driver of threats to national security. These same growth policies have been used abroad to create those coming to the United States. Billions were made by creating billions of people, who now threaten our future – and your kids’ future – at home and abroad.

Many in the generations that came before died to defend democracy – town halls where we trusted one another. They did not die to ensure economic growth for a nation of consumers in shopping malls, run by far off boards and bureaucrats who leech the wealth.

To the extent wealth made can be used to rebuild democracy – long run – by funding responsible parenting, we deserve to take and use it as such. Doing so is defending freedom – just in a more complex way than we are used to. For truly free persons who wish to orient their lives based on a system of being empowered with share equity rather than living under extreme wealth entitlements made via inequity, backed by state violence that cannot be justified, there is no obligation that comes before ensuring the thresholds for being and development, described below. Doing so constitutes freedom at the first border of power, a border that overrides and precedes national borders. We owe our first obligations to the governed, and the future majority, and never the government which has no inherent authority – especially not to protect concentrations of wealth and power, and those that lie for them.

Need a more concrete reason to act?

Reason Two: One of those costs is horrific child neglect and abuse, and we can end it.

Guess who really suffers from growth policies based on not ensuring good homes for all kids? Five children die, often tortured to death, and the hands of their parents in the United States each day,

Child abuse and neglect are common. At least one in seven children experienced child abuse or neglect in the past year in the United States. This is likely an underestimate because many cases are unreported. In 2021, 1,820 children died of abuse and neglect in the United States.

Children living in poverty experience more abuse and neglect. Experiencing poverty can place a lot of stress on families, which may increase the risk for child abuse and neglect. Rates of child abuse and neglect are five times higher for children in families with low socioeconomic status compared to families with a higher socioeconomic status.

Child maltreatment is costly. In the United States, the total lifetime economic burden associated with child abuse and neglect was about $592 billion in 2018.5 This economic burden rivals the cost of other high-profile public health problems, such as heart disease and diabetes.

Photo by JPagetRF Photos/BigStock

No child should be born to parents who are not ready to do a good job. And we can ensure that, through things like financial incentives that pay would-be parents to wait, and show readiness. It works – and we know where those who should fund it live. Why would we not make the wealthy, who benefitted from poor family planning policies and growth, not pay to end it? Why should kids suffer to enrich a few? Halting the torture of children justifies action.

Again, this works. Some funders are moving away from dysfunctional charity, and towards fair start freedom. Others can be urged to do the same.

TAKE ACTION: There is a move before the United Nations to make national sovereignty and authority fully contingent on making each citizen a sovereign, or self-determining, using measurable outcomes. This is the core of freedom and democracy, and it would authorize targeting concentrations of extreme wealth for the freedom they took from us, and our kids. Back that move by sharing the link above, and demanding the UN act.

August 7, 2024
If Your Parents Have Money, They Made It at Deadly Cost to Other Children. Avoid the Death Debt You Will Inherit.

The climate crisis is already killing millions, and is forecast to quickly escalate. Women and children are some of the most likely to die.

Future generations will die in heat waves because of what we – or more specifically older generations – did.

At base, the crisis was caused because our political systems allowed some to accumulate wealth without accounting for the costs that wealth was imposing on the environment and future generations, and also the costs of investing enough in birth, development, and emancipatory conditions for all children that would have protected them even in the face of ecological disaster.

Many would say the wealth was made illegally, in violation of established children’s rights and the right to a healthy environment. Many in the Fair Start Movement have worked for scammy animal rights or environmental charities that were being funded by wealthy families that wanted to hide these facts.

These charities literally started by backing illegal, cost-shifting entitlements in the industries they claimed to oppose because to question those would mean questioning the entitlements of their funders. Instead, they chose less effective campaigns that were being undone by growth. That was a huge mistake,

And they succeeded in hiding the facts and the shifting of wealth – enough to threaten a billion deaths by the end of the century. Anyone claiming to create a benefit is quietly undoing their work and furthering illegitimate and non-inclusive political systems by not first ensuring share equity for children entering the world, which means an equal and influential capacity for all to self-determine the social and ecological influences others have over other them.

Here is how to fix what went wrong. Wealth is owed for the costs it placed on others, and if it is taken to fund young women to plan their families in a way that avoids the harm – and would save millions of lives, it can be taken by all means effective.

As children of wealthy parents, you can help move the funds and avoid carrying the death debt your parents would leave you with.

As things get worse you will be targeted for what your parents did. Don’t fall into that trap.

Why all means effective? Moving money, made illegally, to save millions of lives, morally overrides property rights.

Also, it’s physically impossible to have a legally obligating “we” – the one that expressly or impliedly precedes all legitimate national constitutions, without measurable birth equity, but rich families, corrupt officials, and religious interests worked together – between 1948 and 1968 – to hide this fact and make us think that national sovereignty and entitlements to wealth are magically inherent, rather than having to derive from the measurable sovereignty or self-determination of its subjects.

The only way to ensure share equity is to entitle would-be parents to only bring children into the world above a certain threshold of planned conditions measurable on eight metrics, and given that wealth was made at deadly climate costs to future generations, that wealth must be used to ensure the conditions.

TAKE ACTION: Urge your parents 1) to admit the facts above, and 2) to only fund work that prioritizes share equity override – the right to be measurably empowered before any other right, which will actually protect the most numerous and vulnerable victims of the mistakes prior generations made.

August 7, 2024
Don’t Get Scammed by Charities. Without Prioritizing Fair Starts in Life for All Kids They Are Undoing Their Impacts.

Looking closely at at public statements many charities make you will find false and misleading information. The unsustainable growth most never mention is easily undoing the benefit of the impacts claimed, and is accelerating the climate crisis in a way that is killing millions.

This is impact fraud.

Many make the claims because the people funding them rely on growth-driven investments. Greenwashing and growthwashing lawsuits are being filed against the worst of charities.

How wrong are the statements they make? Try three-quarters of the climate mitigation efforts undone by the growth many wealthy funders benefited from at deadly cost to others – and that study was conducted before AI models anticipated new-level heat waves. Let’s not undo what we claim to do with growth that hurts the future – mostly for children of color with no means to fight the growing heat.

What is the fix? As described by Ms. Magazine:

It’s simple = take the costs of our wealth and incentivize women having of children only at a time, place and with resources that offset the costs. There are special savings accounts, and debt recognitions, that make this a reality. That halts growth, and compensates those most harmed.

Can you back our efforts by using your money to reverse the universal paradigm – the lie – of parental autonomy towards concrete and well-enforced rules that ensure child equity? Can you give $1000 today to change the universal rule of who we should become as communities – from exploitative to investive?

Give here.

The changes we seek at the UN are underway on the ground in Uganda.

August 6, 2024
Why Add Fair Start to Your Work? Why Tell the Truth That the Good We Claimed to Do Has Been Undone Because We Ignored Children’s Rights as They Entered the World?

Free persons will make their obligation to follow the laws of their nation contingent on a universal system of empowerment that tends to unite our values. But the chance to do so – and save millions of lives – is not something we ever talk about. Below are two moves you can make to change that.

We formed Fair Start because many of our members, in prior public statements about our work and successes, omitted facts that would have revealed that our claims were inaccurate, with the progress being undone by other factors. These were factors from which we were fundamentally benefiting at deadly cost to others, and our omissions hid life-saving entitlements. I personally omitted these facts – enriching myself, and other white families, at deadly cost to many black children.

Many others are doing the same.

Omitting positionality, and its costs for others

These omissions hid the full impact of our positionality, climatologically and otherwise, in contradiction of the values we all live (like evading deadly heat waves, being counted as an influential equal in politics, wanting at least the choice to have children in safe conditions, etc.) – including the value of self-determination. They also delayed and minimized climate reparations, skewing the baseline used to determine them. At base, the omissions hid that we were benefiting from coercive and obligatory legal systems the protected current entitlements without paying the correlative costs: Ensuring, at birth, children’s rights to political equity.

These omissions hid an obvious error in our thinking about what it means to be free, for nations to be sovereign and legitimate, and the role that laws around the world governing families play in this. The error combined with the climate crisis will mean the death of millions, many of whom could be saved if we admit and reverse the mistake.

Freedom or autonomy to do what you want always follows and flows from the freedom or autonomy of being physically included as an equal in your democracy. Simply as a matter of logic, who we should be comes first, and it derives – and should derive – from our creation and development, relative to others and our environment. Adults with human rights – our first and inescapable obligations to others – would first have had rights as children, rights which would have also defined the reproductive rights that should have guide our creation, so that we are not born into conditions and with power relations that functionally disabled the rights. This is not altruism, but a commitment to being truly free by first limiting who has influence over you, and the amount of influence they have, through family reforms that ensure children enter the world and are raised in conditions consistent with their joining communities of free persons.

Those who accumulated wealth because of a misplaced sense of freedom – freedom from environmental regulations, from being a responsible parent, from the requirement to not take what you did not earn – were just harming others, benefiting by placing the true costs on others. They were acting in a way that determined the lives of others using birth positionality and ecological impacts, not in a free, or relatively self-determining, way. They owe those costs to the future children they harmed.

Equity, or a share of control, as the first move towards freedom

Fair Start means children being born and raised with real equity – where each person eventually can offset the influence of others in a measurable way, and control through rulemaking who has influence or power over them. The first entitlements in any political system belong to would-be parents, not government or the wealthy. They belong to those plan families around child equity using seven concrete metrics based on values we all live day to day. The rules of creation are unique because the values become inextricable in the act, including the value of subjective choice.

The entitlements – structured around antiracism and decolonization – enable parents delaying having kids until they are truly ready, as well as having and raising those kids at a time, in a place, and with resources where those children can truly self-determine and thus legitimate the nations they form. As such we all have more of a right and responsibility to enforce those primary entitlements than the government, or any group, has to deny them.

Obligation to follow the law is conditional on being empowered through birth and developmental positionality. Dare anyone to logically explain to you how we get to a fair system with an unfair start – without the equity of an equal and influential role in making the fundamental rules that limit the influence we have over each other. We get to true reproductive autonomy – in the fullest sense where women who can terminate pregnancies don’t later die in anthropogenic heat waves – via birth equity for future children, without which autonomy becomes impossible.

Starting in 2004 I helped raise millions for animal charities by claiming to use the U.S. legal system to save the lives of animals. The statements I made carried deadly omissions, making them inaccurate. The focus on low impact micro victories hid that progress was being undone – and in deadly ways – on a macro level that was taking infinitely more animals than I was saving. Often we siloed off the issue of nonhuman rights because it was easier to raise money, avoid complexity, and evade additional controversy. Often we avoided the issue of birth equity because leaders did not want to examine their own children’s unearned privileges, or because they had quietly given up on their professed causes while retaining their positions and salaries. The combined impact of those silos, across the spectrum of public interest work, led us to the word in which we live today.

In truth that legal system – like almost all around the world – offered no real protection to nonhumans or the future children that will determine animals’ lives, because it did not financially entitle would-be parents to plan well, in an equitable way that will not harm both the children and the nonhumans. The system, like many others, was on balance – at a macro level – eradicating animals and exacerbating the climate crisis for the most vulnerable humans in what is accurately described as racist ecocide. Through my omissions I hid the error described above and the claims many have to reparations.

This, along with the withdrawal of litigation meant to begin to reverse the error described above, helped many wealthy funders backing those and other organizations evade or reduce liability for the climate crisis. I hid how the legal system was undermining its own legitimacy – acting like a one-sided social contract, robbing future children of their rights to minimum levels of welfare, equality of opportunity, and safe and natural environment, and an equal and influential voice in governance while obligating them to follow laws that protected property rights, for example.

The deadly costs of what is not said

I benefited from hiding the true nature of what I was doing: Fundamentally placing deadly costs on children that undid what I was claiming to do for animals, both socially and ecologically, children like Anthony Avalos who was tortured to death by his caregivers, and Mbabazi Judith, who died in eastern Uganda of the malaria the climate crisis is making more deadly. The system from which I benefitted systematically disenfranchised and treated them as economic inputs – as means, rather than as empowered ends comprising democracies.

Theirs and millions of children’s deaths derived – fundamentally – from a system that benefits me and others by protecting current entitlements, allowing us to determine the lives of others, rather than ensuring the primary parental entitlements that help constitute free nations. It could have been any of us that died in this way, and justice starts with being empathetic enough to avoid these situations by exploiting others as means as they enter the world. Equity does not conflict with autonomy if we ensure it precedes it between birth and emancipation, but the human brain struggles with time frames this large, and many have taken advantage of this fact.

Take Action:

Some are beginning to fix this deadly problem with two simple moves: 1) Making the same admission we make here and urging others to do likewise, moving towards the truth and the language of dynamic and conditional political obligation. Find specific and public statements they have made, and engage them.

Then 2) urge them to begin modeling the changes above, including giving equitable, family planning entitlements as climate reparations, and as our primary obligation even before taxes, to ensure governance and obligation actually flow from the governed. Engage the adult children and employees of those who should be modeling this change the most, and understand what’s at stake.

Freedom, or self-determination, by definition first flows from the restoration of nature (a baseline defined by the relative absence of human influence) achieved via delayed parenting, which is entitled through birth and developmental equity funding pegged inverse to wealth. This is owed as the first and overriding human right, and it allows each to be relatively free at the most fundamental level from the ecological and social influence of others – and thus capable of constituting a system of legitimate governance.

This process does not need violence because unlike our current system it is politically inclusive, or constitutive. All rules should be fair, and that which determines our creation is the first rule. That rule contains an inescapable logic: That if government truly derives from the governed, young women would have justification to obtain funds for life-saving equitable family planning entitlements – to give all kids a fair start in life – and actually constitute legitimate nations and become a “we,” more than the state would have to use violence to keep that wealth where it is.

For example, here we would want a United States Senator to alter and complete legislation for “baby bonds.” In reality, all of his authority is premised on the change because without it he’s not really representing democratically empowered citizens. The same could be said of courts’ authority to judge the legality of protests to constitute a better future. To ignore these limits is to focus on the symbolic, and not the real. The United Nations could easily (and really should) say so and make the first move in taking human rights seriously. There is no inclusive “we” from which to coercively assign property or other rights without this primary process.

This is social change through role modeling. It can actually help evade acts of mass violence – long run – from the many who feel disempowered. It can do so by revealing those who truly benefitted from the political process, and how to reverse it peacefully.

All of this is not a matter of academics or research. It’s just a factual history and a action commitment to not being obligated to follow the laws of nations that do not empower all members in an equitable and measurable way.

Join the Fair Start Tell the Truth and Act Campaign with the two moves above and bend the arc of our species towards a better future.

April 23, 2024
The Mother of Animal Law on Fair Start as the Core of Protecting Animals

Joyce Tischler is rightly regarded by many as key to the flourishing of modern animal law as an area of study, practice, and discipline.

She has this to say about Fair Start, and the idea of getting ahead of the threats animals face by changing our basic family systems:

“I have seen the projection that there will be approximately 9.8 billion human beings on Earth in 2050, followed by the question: how will we feed all of those people? That’s a simplistic question. If our planet is to remain habitable, we need to ask different questions, and develop family planning that limits or reduces the number of humans, in a thoughtful and compassionate way. Fair Start is asking the right questions and developing innovative answers.”

February 25, 2024
Dr. Phoebe Barnard on Fair Start Revolutions

“”We are at a crossroads of human civilization – where we find ourselves facing many symptoms of ecological overshoot playing out in our climate, the loss and degradation of Nature and environmental resources, and social, economic and political tensions. From floods and fires to the loss of snowpack and water, the extinction of species, to road rage, strained service delivery, corruption, unemployment, crowding, the threat of autocracy and partisan violence – all are destabilizing our societies.

The key to resolving all of these symptoms – each grave in its own right – is facing the systemic, structural inequities and attitudes of entitlement that have brought our societies increasingly to their knees.

Fairness, tolerance, humility and the needs of future generations – of our own and other species – are crucial if we are to successfully run this gauntlet of the next decades and still retain a civilization. Esther Afolaranmi and others have been promoting structural changes through ethics, law and public policy instruments that lead us in the right direction. Their work needs to be heard if we are to take a highly unequal, dysfunctional society and set it on a wiser and more just path.”

Dr.Phoebe Barnard

February 16, 2024
Fair Start for Kids

A lot of what we see around us, and what we think, is affected by our unique position in the world and our pasts – the way our genetics impact our thinking, what we experienced in our lives, and what we were taught.

But some things are objectively true, regardless of our perceptions. It is objectively – in the world beyond our minds – true that there is a number in the picture above. Much more importantly, if there is a car accident and many are hurt, we know – objectively – that something went wrong and we need to help the injured, starting with the most injured.

We would want to be cared for, and that helps us know that others would too. That we ought to do that is objectively true, just as in the picture above, it is true that we can see a number.

Today many are being hurt by increasing world temperatures – the climate catastrophe, with millions dying and hundreds of millions – including babies – at risk. The most at-risk and injured are women and children of color from nations that did little if anything to create the climate catastrophe.

They need money and other resources from the wealthiest governments, families, and companies in the world to survive. And because all the wealth was made by not paying the costs to women and children that would have avoided creating the catastrophe, they really owe that money to the women and children. The wealthy made the money because they never had to share the money in women and children enough to protect the climate and ensure children their rights, and instead they were able to benefit from the unsustainable growth the create their wealth.

They were able to fill their factories and shopping malls with many other because they did not have to share enough to make sure all kids got the full education, food and healthcare their kids got, and they were able to build so many factories and shopping malls that it hurt the environment we all share – killing many animals and causing mass extinction of whole species.

Imagine that those above playing in the game above have fun are the wealthy and their families, who will be relatively safe from the climate crisis the creation of their wealth created, and those behind the fence are everyone else. To help those behind the fence to join the game too, some will fight to take down the fence – to move the resources women and children need so they can joint the game and have fun. They will make sure the wealth gets paid back to those harmed.

Like those who fought for freedom before, against human rights abusers for example, those who want to get children what they need are doing what is right. What you will see them doing is trying to change the system of who makes the rules, and why we follow those rules. In the old days some men used violence to force others to follow the rules these men made. In the last few hundred years that changes so that some men used resources – money, food, healthcare, being welcome in one’s community, etc. – as an incentive to reward to get others to follow the rules these men made. Those who want to get children what they need want to ensure everyone can really participate in making the rules – like you might do in a classroom when creating a new game – so they naturally follow them.

And just as it is objectively true that we can see a number above, and that those harmed by others deserve our help, it is objectively true that the needs of women and children come first because the childhoods they create first determine who we are – our relations to each other and our environment. Mothers make us who we are, and who we should be. Think about where you came from – how you were created.

That came first, before now. We know that objectively. Where we came from – how we were created and the things we had growing up – first determines a lot about what we do and think today.

And when we start deciding what we should do, and what we owe others, we always start at the beginning. Mothers make us who we are, and who we should be – and being fair and good to those who have been harmed comes first.

January 14, 2024
You Are Helping Undo the Things Your Life Showed You Really Value. Change Course.
If you look back at your life there are certain things that you really valued. Look at how you lived your life, day to day, and you will see them:
- minimum thresholds of personal welfare and wealth.
- expecting equal access to opportunities.
- participating in and adhering to political/legal systems that purported to represent the governed and where each has an influence on the outcome, and thus ensure the capacity for us to choose who has influence (including climatologically) or power over us – to be free.
- using and enjoying an environment relatively conducive to human and nonhuman health.
- enjoying the right to have a child in relatively safe conditions.
Why follow, and through your support ensure the continuation of a legal system, that does not protect these basic – or inclusive – values, as is the case in the United States today? Read the facts here. Our legal system is degrading them.

Everyone exhibits these values as they live, and they give a primary and better way to assess value than what we choose to buy, the current benchmark for value in our political systems. The list of values above enable the inclusion that makes representative governance possible, or the human rights and political legitimacy that must come before the economization of life. These values are the elements of self-determination, or what we call often call freedom. They underlie more elaborate specifications of values like the Children’s Rights Convention. Legitimate governance protects freedom.

But how do we protect these values? The truth is we can first undo them based on our choice of and how we interact with fundamental political systems – following rules, paying taxes, collecting benefits, seeing our privileges as entitlements, etc. Do we choose a system that ensures these values – or one that is degrading its own ecologies, the role of its citizens in their democracies, and even equality of opportunity? And a system that does so for others as they are born and developed? Do we further the degradation of these values in the way we use language, in what we mean – objectively – when we say words like “sustainable,” “humane,” “democratic,” or “fair?” Or do we, in our very words and reinforcement of our realities, disintegrate the world from what we value and seed constant distrust and illegitimacy by calmly refusing to share with others?

These values are all first and mostly impacted in the act of having kids – in the act of creating others and crucially, creating fundamental power relations in the process. And not just for the kids we have – things like growth-based environmental damage is reducing welfare for all.

Right now our political systems and the family policies they promote – almost universally undermine every one of those values. Our outdated family policies – that avoid entitlements for young women to plan birth and developmental equity – ensure children are tortured to death by their own parents, more and more animals are subjected to suffering and death, other species are wiped out, the gap between rich and poor widens, and each person has less of a say in their political systems. These policies have created the political space for the reemergence of abortion and contraception bans, and enable influencers in media to openly push women to have more children to grow economies.

TAKE ACTION: There are dozens of ways to change the political systems and the family policies they promote.

Urge any organization to back policies that ensure the conditions in which children are born and raised, including their environment, as well as resources and role models, are being improved through things like family planning, parenting readiness and delay, birth equity and smaller family entitlements. Given the primacy of children’s rights and the millions of lives at stake, young women engaged in fair start demands would have greater justification for using coercion to assure what their child needs than unrepresentative government would have to defend illegitimate property rights created and maintained at deadly cost to primarily children of color. They, not men with guns, would be constituting a just future. And people, not written constitutions, constitute nations and people are born with the need for particular resources in order to develop as citizens (rather than consumers) – they do not merely fall from the sky.
January 10, 2024
The Raymonds Made Their Wealth at Cost to Your and Your Kids’ Freedom. We Can Take It Back.
John T. Raymond is the son of Lee Raymond, who have may have done more to exacerbate the climate emergency than any one person.

John, who through his father became an fossil fuel magnate in his own right, is a great example of unearned and massive birth privilege.

And because he is in the business of fossil fuels, the wealth he “owns” was made at cost – through the climate crisis – to those in the future. The cost of much of his family’s wealth could be the death of millions.

John T. Raymond is great example of the climate trolley problem, recently covered in Newsweek. What if you could save millions by engaging one man? You can. John. T Raymond is worth hundreds of millions of dollars, money made by externalizing costs and risks on others.

That money could be used to reform the way we create families, moving from parent focused modes that isolate us to child-centric modes that unify communities, which would be the most just and effective response to the climate crisis.

It could reduce emissions in a massive way, and relocate children – while arming them with resources – to safety. This change could unfold in ways that impact billions of at-risk families over time.

That move is not just reducing emissions, but readying future generations for the worst.

This will save millions of lives, and end policies that are irrefutably racist and ecocidal.

And because families come first, this unique reform limits John’s property rights (capturing the costs his wealth foisted on others). We are just, before we own justly. We have a right to engage him on this issue of unpaid costs, and the need to cover climate reparation, because governments cannot assign rights in derogation of our being – at constitutional level – free and equal. What I just said has been subject to multiple positive peer reviews, and some have tried to hide it because of what this truth could do.

There are baselines for assessing costs and benefits, including when we use currencies like freedom, but all would have to start with how systems of obligation – like the laws that protect John’s wealth – actually include the persons they impact in the allocation decision-making process. Are they actually constitutive or obligatory, or attenuated from their subjects? The particular laws that protect John’s wealth do not fare well when scrutinized. They are based on creating lots of people for shopping malls rather than ensuring minimum levels of development in each person to ready them for town halls. Freedom comes in reversing that basic form of disempowerment.

One could argue that the positive law entitlements described in the first link of this paragraph must control in the absence of agreement otherwise, but unpacked that boils down to doing what the government – the men with guns – says, because it is the government. But that, as a reason, is the opposite of the ideal of American freedom.

This is all beyond liberalism or conservatism. We might equally target the lead at the New York Times – Joseph Kahn – for his role, his use of power, in holding up the family system that created John’s wealth.

Justice means more freedom for all.

TAKE ACTION: Contact John here through his agents, and urge him to do the right thing, or find and reason with him lawfully and peacefully in person and we will publicize your bravery. Free persons will limit and decentralize the influence others have over them (including climatological influence) by physically constituting just communities, relative to a neutral baseline like a restored climate and nature, such that we are not interfering with the freedom or relative self-determination of others.

John, using some of his wealth to give back to future generations and reorient what we mean by being free, could lead in this regard.

Want to be effective? Target other choke point high-value targets like Vladimir Putin (who financed western oil companies) or Joseph Kahn, lead editor at the New York Times, who urges women to have kids to in order to further grow the economy that is ensuring the climate crisis.
January 8, 2024