The Tell the Truth campaign calls on all who claim to improve the world to report their impacts in the context of children entering the world—relative to the rights and conditions they are promised.
Are organizations truly accounting for the life experiences of the most vulnerable—infants and the animals they will impact? When we evaluate this honestly, we see how today’s ecological and political crises arose: those who appeared to be making progress were, in reality, reinforcing inequality and environmental destruction.
Exposing the Truth
We are fact-checking organizations that claim to support justice but fail to account for birth equity and sustainability, including:
The Weeden Foundation
Mercy for Animals
Wikipedia and the Center for Biological Diversity
Animal Rights Philanthropist Brad Goldberg
This process reveals how public interest efforts often use flawed standards that hide their role in worsening the crises they claim to solve. By failing to prioritize birth equity, they reinforce systemic injustice, climate devastation, and political inequality.
The Core Issue: A Flawed Standard Driving Global Crises
For decades, nonprofits, media, and business leaders ignored the impact of population growth and inequality, creating a false narrative of progress. Their standards for measuring impact exclude birth equity, ensuring a cycle of privilege for some while disempowering others—especially children of color. This approach has:
Undermined climate and racial justice efforts
Allowed unsustainable economic growth to masquerade as progress
Ensured wealth remains concentrated at the expense of the most vulnerable
A Necessary Shift: Fair Start as the Overriding Human Right
Instead of perpetuating injustice, we must reallocate extreme wealth to ensure every child is born into a system of reparations, with access to essential resources, education, and a sustainable environment. This includes:
Parenting delay and readiness programs
Family planning incentives inversely tied to privilege
A shift in policy to prioritize children’s rights as the foundation of justice
Holding Institutions Accountable
Fair Start activists, many of whom previously worked in leading nonprofits, are exposing how these organizations profited from systems that violated children’s rights. Legal action is underway, including climate tribunals in Africa, to challenge these harmful practices.
Take Action: Tell the Truth
We urge organizations and individuals to:
Assess and report impacts honestly—How does your work account for birth equity and the rights of future generations?
Support policy reforms that place children’s rights at the center of governance and sustainability efforts.
Admit the truth—continuing to ignore this reality does more harm than good.
Justice starts with birth equity. It’s time to tell the truth and demand real accountability.
If you are worried about Trump and Musk as threats to democracy, ask yourself what your company has been doing – at the most basic level of measurably empowering and freeing children as they entered the world – to actually protect democracy.
What in your company’s cost/benefit analysis covered the costs of children only being born into conditions consistent with the Children’s Rights Convention, the basis for human rights and democracy? Or did your company, like Trump and Musk, assume those kids were valuable economic inputs in your growth model?
Were you quietly enjoying growth-based investments that exponentially undid climate and animal protection reforms, and enriched those you criticize? Did your company make money on veganfood investments relying on growth, and massive wealth differentials for black and white kids, that did more harm than good?
We don’t get to justice through injustice, and punching down on infants and animals with zero actual birth equity protections.
Hypocritical companies, fake charities and nepotistic foundations that did nothing to ensure fair starts in life for all kids, which means measurable equity or effective shares in one’s democracy, created Trump and Musk at the most basic level.
Take action: If you knew your company, foundation, or charity was making fake impact claims where benefits were being undone by growth that enriched some families at deadly cost to those in vulnerable hot spots around the world, please contact: info@fairstartmovement.org
If we want to protect democracy our companies have to build it through the creation of actual power relations by starting at birth and, in the name of intergenrational justice, targeting key bad actors who lied about impacts while making their money at cost to children and animals. They owe that money because they used fraud and unfair competition, omitting deadly costs in their public impact statements, in order to make it.
We have an obligation to take that wealth back and ensure – through delayed parenting and collective family planning incentives inverse to wealth – that no child is born beneath a line of being empowered.
Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation
Freedom from the power of others starts with rights, and the first right is not about how we act, but rather our creation – children’s birthrights that determine whether they are empowered by the conditions in which they are born and raised, and their level of empowerment and influence relative to others in the world. Freedom is not based on an assessment using fictitious borders like lines on a globe, but rather the true border of being relatively self versus other determining, and controlling who – via creation – we actually have to share the world with. It’s about who actually has influence over you, climatologically, financially, pedagogically, etc. When you fear your fellow citizens, have real influence over your political representatives, suffer in human induced heat waves, cannot access nature, and are controlled by employers, you are not free.
That means our first obligations are not to written constitutions, governments, or the wealthy, but to the future children from whose empowerment those things derive their authority. And that starts with prioritized funding for responsible family planning, where we invest enough in each child to enable them to offset their fundamental political influence equally, relative to a neutral position. Those who reject those obligations to future children fall outside the scope of deserving legal protection because they do not offer it to others in the crucial formation of legal/power relations. They can be accused of and held accountable for reparations fraud, or denying future generations justice. How else should we frame cost/benefit systems, in the constituting of our relations with others, that make some kids billionaires and kill others?
Do current fraud laws cover that? Remember that law must be interpreted to legitimate itself, and the areas of positive law necessary to carry the Fair Start reform forward, including constitutional, fraud, consumer protection, child welfare, environmental, nationality, democracy, civil rights, and others, must be preemptively interpreted to ensure inclusion and representation. Government and the wealthy can’t avoid liability by writing its own rules in ways that determine that liability. As such, treaties like the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as well as others must be enforced by the ultimate source of authority, the people.
How do we make this change? Language matters, because it would be physically impossible to be free without accurately premised communications that capture how we fundamentally become legally obligated to others as they enter the world, and we are preemptively obligated to communicate in accord with that obligation if we are to be self-determining. How then could we account for fundamental obligations without ensuring children are born and raised in child-rights compliant conditions? If those who owe future generations for the fraud described above are willing to tell the truth, we urge them to then shift some percentage of their resources to incentivize measurably fair starts in life for all kids as the most just and effective solution to the problems we face today.
Practically we ensure this change and those rights by entitling would-be parents to parenting delay payments, inverse to wealth and income. Given the first point above, the rights to the wealth needed for the entitlements override the rights of those currently claiming to own the wealth, in part because the owners made the wealth through unsustainable growth and loss of political equity, or the externalizing of costs that required violating children’s birthrights. There is an analogy for the shift that is needed: All work is done on a floor that is falling apart, and some want to keep going by relying on the arbitrary privilege of their draw in the birth lottery, while others fall through and clutch at those around them, taking many down. By delaying the replacement of the floor, these free riders threaten us all. It is physically impossible to be free, as in self-determining, if we cannot ask how our communications account for and then assure that persons are created, developed and emaciated in ways that offset equally their capacity to influence political systems, relative to a neutral position or objective standard for evaluation. Without that 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.
Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation
Fair Start formed because of the common use, in U.S. companies, nonprofits, media, universities, etc. of an illegal assessment and reporting standard, one designed to evade the costs of complying with the Children’s Rights Convention. The standard is used to hide climate damage liability, and is based on the same fundamentally Illegal metrics that caused the climate crisis and millions of deaths with it.
The standard – deriving from efforts to subvert civil rights movements – centers on using top-down, abstract, and arbitrary measures for social justice and public interest outcomes, rather than zeroing out harm in the actual creation – in birth and development – of power relations and political equity.
We can all change that standard, and with easy conversations that begin with questions like:
“We noticed you said this about your work and impact. We worry this relies on use of the same fundamental assessment and reporting standard that caused the climate crisis. How were you accounting for children’s rights as they entered the world when you claimed to have a beneficial impact?”
You don’t get to justice by starting at injustice.
What’s justice?
It starts with existence, with birth, developmental and emancipatory positionality – or what we understand to be the commonly accepted idea of intergenerational justice as minimum thresholds for children entering the world, though those thresholds must necessarily modified to account for the fundamental driver of the climate crisis. That driver, at based, is the failure of world leaders to elevate measurable political equity as the value from which legitimate governance and legal obligation derives.
Fair Start’s research shows that ignoring this factor meant that many charities on balance did more to enrich the families of wealthy investors/funders than accomplish their missions.
By not accounting for the fair or equitable creation of actual power relations at birth, our social justice and public interest work became performative, abstracted from reality in a way that ensured the current crises. Our peer-reviewed research also shows that all legal obligations derive from language that accurately captures our first obligations to others, and given our harming future children in the climate crisis, the corrective admissions we call for here will move our language towards mutually empowering all using measurable self-determination – not disempowering exploitation for unsustainable economic growth – as the base value.
Dignity requires orienting from truth, from reaerations, not failed forms of charity and after-the-fact justice derived from injustice.
Change can start with interim disclaimers like “our work does not account for inequity,” as well as making disclosures under the Fair Start Tell the Truth campaign contrasting omissive claims that used the status quo standards with measures of actual harm to vulnerable infants and animals.
Background
The core problem originates from the subversion of the civil rights and anti-apartheid movements, decades ago, when world leaders removed political equity from reproductive rights regimes, essentially ensuring “separate but equal” standards in families. Without political equity, reproductive rights regimes became fundamentally unjust and unsustainable, skewing what it means to be self versus other-determining by wrongly treating the act of having children as more personal to the parents than other-determining for the child. The regimes enabled prior generations to abuse an unlimited right to have children at cost to the rights of current and future generations, creating massive inequity and ecocidal growth.
To the extent wealthy, mostly white, families owed reparative justice, this was reparations fraud, the evasion of theheavy investments in racially equitable birth, development, and emancipatory conditions child rights required.
The lack of investment, the lack of necessitating rights compliant early childhood development conditions, directly enabled catastrophic growth and massive inequality, which measurably did more harm than subsequent philanthropic efforts, all tainted by the desire to exploit the growth, did good because it blocked life-saving funds in favor of concentrating and growing generational wealth.
Those concentrations are so extreme today that they can ensure sustained propaganda of an underpopulation “crisis” in the middle of a growth-driven climate crisis killing millions. They use an illegal standard for cost/benefit assessment and reporting that was designed to benefit the children of wealthy investor-philanthropists by arbitrarily scoring their worth higher than other children, in violation of the rights of all children. Continued use of that standard gives rise to justifiable retaliation.
Those insufficient public interest efforts would have inevitably treated children of color as deserving a fraction of the resources and political influence, and exponentially more risk, meaning that today billions of persons are at extreme risk from a climate crisis they had little to no role in causing. The impact claims this philanthropy funded were wildly off base, being undone daily by the growth driving political inequity (while enriching many of the funders).
There is no universe in which those positive impacts actually occurred – they were simply reported out of the context of negative offset, omitting the largest determinant undoing the benefits every day, making social justice a top-down and performative charade.
There is no way to assess value in the world that would not be measured relative to basic infant health and life prospects, including self-determination, because infant health and development is the objective basis through which humans experience all value, and the fundamental baseline for unifying values like health, equity, democracy, etc. It is the minimum measure, or floor, for political legitimacy. 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.
Much of the philanthropy we see today, which avoids discussion of how inequitable growth easily reversed infant development outcomes, does more to hide this problem than fix it. In fact, funders have blocked some efforts to reform the standards, thereby minimizing climate damage evaluations, including amounts, the weight or priority of claims, universal enforceability, and priority uses of funds.
But continuing that tradition and policy of ignoring political equity in reproductive rights goes beyond racism. By hiding from policy the actual creation – at birth – of power relations, it skews how we see the world, treating the most interpersonal thing – having kids – as personal. This moves values, like nature, equity and democracy, from defining a subject-level “we” towards being minimized objects in our sentences, which has enabled things like discount rates and other top-down inaccuracies that exacerbated the climate crisis. The focus will be on emissions, ignoring how growth undoes reductions while bringing children into the world without the resources to deal with the impacts.
Against all of this, Fair Start, or equity, is the preemptive standard to assess reparations and reparations fraud because governments cannot create their own definitions of legitimacy in lieu of the objective measure for that value.
There are a few tactics we can use to change the standard:
Why? Bringing future children into the world is the largest determinant of outcomes in the long run, and because who we should be – fundamentally relating to one another based on rights and not growth commerce – comes before what we do, we can take radical action to move the incentivizing funds. Would we really think it racist to deny employment to someone because of their race, but to ignore climate risks to millions because of race-based differences in generational wealth?
Climate change and inequality are birth-interconnected crises that disproportionately harm the most vulnerable, requiring immediate, systemic action.
This is not a choice on a menu of public interest interventions. This work relates to the inescapable system of costs, benefits, and obligations we are all born into, the largest driver of outcomes, and the choice to exploit that system or legitimate it.
If we care about a particular value, like animal liberation, wouldn’t we be eager to account for a fundamental cost/benefit analysis that accounts for the harm wealth has done, and what it owes going forward?
2) Identify and make examples of high profile barriers (nonconstitutive free riders, or “noncons”), many of whom would have funded social justice decoy philanthropy.
Failure to resolve this injustice takes the debtors outside of deserving public (legal/inclusive representative) protection because their bypassing child-rights compliant positionality and formation of relations, means impossible to account for their being included in a comprehensive system of obligation/rights that actually accounts for the costs and benefits of birth positionality. They are not included in any organization of mutual obligation, and deserve as much as they necessitate for the most vulnerable.
Their wealth was fundamentally made at cost to our freedom, and the freedom of others, and there is no reason we should not take it back in order to fundamentally liberate. Their behavior, each day, is evidence of whether they ensure legitimacy, or collective freedom from power, or assume illegal entitlements to benefit at deadly cost to others while masquerading as free.
This tactic can begin by asking government officials, wealthy individuals and families, and key leaders across all sectors whether they think kids deserve a fair start on life; how they are accounting for entitlements that ensure children only being born into conditions that comply with their rights under the Children’s Convention so that we can all share a legitimate, or rights-based, political system; and to admit their entitlements derive from and are conditioned upon an obligation to measurably empower the constituents in a way that actually justifies governance.
This can include focusing on the adult children of key targets, who under the preemptive standards above would inherit the death debt of their parents.
For decades the majority of assumptions in population ethics, as a field, have been fundamentally premised on welfare improvements that the climate crisis has now reversed. There is no room for continued debate under the status quo entitlements, as the death rate climbs. Illegal power derives from the illusion of representative authority, used to to justify the exclusive right to the use of violence. But free persons will only follow rules that are fair, and the first rule accounts for our creation or positioning into the system of rules, so that we are more self-determining than determined by others.
3) The Fair Start Tell the Truth (TTT) campaign: In the campaign we take omissive impact claims that were relative to an impact and assessment standard that scored children of color as deserving less resources and more risk, and instead include the full impacts to create contrast. Language matters, because it would be physically impossible to be free without communications that capture how we fundamentally become legally obligated to others as they enter the world, and we are thus preemptively obligated to communicate in accord with shared values to be self-determining.
There is no such thing as an inclusive, representative, and hence legitimate legal system without that.
The TTT campaign allows everyone to relate their experiences to the dynamic reality of the most vulnerable, children entering the world and impacting animals – in the actual first creation of unjust power relations – rather than relating those experiences to decoy points (politicians, celebrities, advertising, etc.) created by the powerful. All legal obligation derives from language, and ours should mutually empower – not disempower – at the base.
Language that accurately reflects and forms obligations has to be accessible to the people who are engaged in the discourse – meaning it definitely is not a traditional constitution in the sense of abstract words. To exemplify this Fair Start is targeting key examples of fraud that go well beyond greenwashing, and in some cases involve criminal conduct that will be investigated before the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
There is an analogy for the shift that is needed: All work is done on a floor that is falling apart, and some want to keep going while others fall through, clutching at the others around them as they fall. These free riders threaten us all. Why? It is physically impossible to be free, as in self-determining, if we cannot ask how and then assure that persons are created, developed and emaciated in ways that offset equally their capacity to influence political systems, 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.
Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation
Our collectively violating children’s right to a fair start in life, and assuming children of color deserved much fewer resources and much more risk, did more to harm our values and missions than any entities have done good.
The Fair Start Movement offers a transformative approach to building a just, sustainable, and equitable world by focusing on equitable opportunities at birth. Why would we tolerate family systems that treat children of color as worth a tiny fraction of the wealth of white children, and deserving of exponentially more risk of dying in the climate crisis? Our research shows altering reproductive rights systems to ensure children’s rights could save millions of lives, and trillions of dollars, and that there is no legitimate system of valuation that does not start with reparative ecologies benchmarked to infant health and political equity.
From an FSM activist: “A friend and I consistently debate environmentalism. He was born to a wealthy family, enlarged that wealth by holding real estate, the value of which increased because of growth-based demand in California. That wealth – made at horrific environmental cost to mostly children of color – allows him not to work, and to elevate his own children’s choices in life even as other children are born into early deaths. That wealth allows him to travel – even enjoying access to private surf locations local surfers can never afford.”
Climate change and inequality are interconnected crises that disproportionately harm the most vulnerable, requiring immediate, systemic action. This is not a choice on a menu of public interest interventions. This work relates to the inescapable system of costs, benefits, and obligations we are all born into, the largest driver of outcomes, and the choice to exploit that system or legitimate it.
Fair Start activists came together because in the nonprofits in which we have previously worked, our collectively violating children’s right to a fair start in life, and assuming children of color deserved much less resources and much more risk, was doing more to harm our values and missions than we did to further them. And in many cases those organizations went out of their way to hide this. Liability for this will be litigated soon in various fora, including climate tribunals in Africa.
Key Question: “What are you doing to ensure children are born into conditions that don’t undo the benefits of the work you’re doing?” Visual: Infographic showing wealth inequality and its cascading effects (education, health, housing, and climate vulnerability).
Addressing the root causes of inequality and environmental degradation is essential to breaking cycles of systemic harm. The unfairness of the birth lottery robbed us of not only legitimacy, but freedom. There is no universe in which beneficial impacts, taken out of context from their relative position to birth equity, occurred. Use of such-out-of-context claims hides the fundamental driver for the deaths: Enabling the powerful over the vulnerable.
Inequality and climate change create cascading challenges for children, impacting their health, safety, and development. One of our grassroots partners in Africa lost a 300k pledge when the funder saw the organization calling for birth equity reparations. Charity and inequity yes, fairness not so much.
Our collectively violating children’s right to a fair start in life, and assuming children of color deserved much less resources and much more risk, did more to harm our values and missions than we did to further them. We all benefited from this, to one degree or another.
Exploiting mothers’ vulnerability to ensure growth, and not first ensuring reparative family reforms that assure children birth and development conditions consistent with the Children’s Condition, does more harm to all of our missions than we are doing good, because the power dynamics that choice creates is degrading the ecological capacity of the planet to ensure infant health – the first and only measure of value.
By ensuring just conditions at birth, we can address root causes of inequality, build resilience, and protect future generations. It’s irrefutable that the authority to govern derives from the governed – from each person having an equitable share or slice of political influence. But family policies have quietly broken the link, degrading democracy at a literally existential level as massive, birth-based disparities in influence grow and the average voice is diluted, drowned out in the crowd.
Fair Start’s intersectional and proactive strategies deliver impactful, scalable solutions for systemic change. Why we need it?
World leaders moved after 1948 to conflate the act of having and not having children under a singular umbrella of autonomy, rather than treating the former as requiring political equity for the child. This hid the nature of freedom, and the equity each has in their political system, by privatizing the creation of political relations. And it led to the measuring, assessing and reporting of public interest outcomes based on standards meant to take oneself out of one’s birth and development context, ensuring children of color were treated as deserving less and placing them at increased risk. This was the hiding, linguistically, of birthright white supremacy and massive death debt with a fraudulent assessment and reporting standard that inverted political obligation, hiding the need for nations to invest equitably in each child just to have basic authority over citizens – to be “representative.”
This is how we get to a world where leaders can say we are underpopulated, when we have exceeded Earth’s carrying capacity, degraded that capacity, disenfranchised the majority of citizens, and ensured the deaths of millions as temperatures rise.
A few moves we are making:
Tell the Truth Campaign: Litigation to set new standards for environmental and equity disclosures. We can legally require disclosures contrasting claims about values with the actual ecosocial baseline children need to experience value, and how their birth and development alters that baseline in a way that harms infants’ needs.
Celebrity Role Model Outreach: Engaging celebrities to advocate for the Fair Start model.
Fair Start Justice and Law Reform: Policy changes addressing intergenerational wealth inequality and climate migration.
Fair Start Climate Litigation: Redefining constitutional freedoms to include equitable birth conditions. The work will include unfair competition cases requiring disclosure of how growth undid claimed impacts, and interventions to litigation defrauding victims of climate reparations. Why do we need this? One of our activists was urged to withdraw litigation that would have set accurate measures for climate harm to children, rather than using the “fox guarding the henhouse” measures governments under pressure from the wealthy have created.
Prevent Child Abuse Before It Starts: Legislative reforms to reduce abuse and neglect through Fair Start Orders.
Fair Start Equity-Based AI Reforms: Ensuring AI development includes measurable equity-based family planning standards.
Fair Start Reparations: Projects like the Fertility Delay Fund and climate reparations pilot programs.
Microfinance for Family Planning: Interest-free loans to support equitable family planning.
Fairness Protests: Peaceful actions demanding climate reparations from major polluters.
The Tell the Truth and Act Campaign sets a new standard for accountability, fostering systemic change and equity for future generations. We need fair start, and Fairness Fridays, because while donors loved Meatless Mondays, the inequitable growth driving vegan food sales did much more harm than dietary change good. We have seen “animal rights” funders choosing growth-based food reforms that did more harm to animals than they were doing good, and just to make money, while holding themselves out as animal saviors to the public.
Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation
If you are worried about Trump and Musk as threats to democracy, ask yourself what your company was doing – at the most basic level of measurably empowering and freeing children as they entered the world – to actually protect democracy.
What in your company’s cost/benefit analysis covered the costs of children only being born into conditions consistent with the Children’s Rights Convention, the basis for human rights and democracy? Or did your company, like Trump and Musk, assume those kids were valuable economic inputs in your growth model?
Were you quietly enjoying growth-based investments that exponentially undid climate and animal protection reforms, and enriched those you criticize? Did your company make money on vegan food investments relying on growth, and massive wealth differentials for black and white kids, that did more harm than good?
We don’t get to justice through injustice, and punching down on infants and animals with zero actual birth equity protections.
Hypocritical companies, fake charities and nepotistic foundations that did nothing to ensure fair starts in life for all kids, which means measurable equity or effective shares in one’s democracy, created Trump and Musk at the most basic level.
Fair Start begins simply with the fact that wealth in the world today was made through growth and at cost to children’s rights because nations illegally evaded their obligation to only bring children into conditions compliant with those rights.
That standard – a demand for family planning resources to ensure children’s rights, which is the most basic standard for who our species should be – is how we can move that same wealth to try to fix the problem.
Many entities in those nations most responsible for the climate crisis are using the same fraudulent impact assessment and reporting standards, ignoring how children entering the world undid sustainable development impacts, that drove the crisis in order to hide their liability or the death of millions.
The rule: All climate reparations must be based on measurable collective self-determination. There are no values outside of that system, given climatological impacts on infants. We find and out those using any other standard, and hold them fully accountable. Government and those they entitle to wealth cannot redefine “harm” to avoid liability for the deaths of millions.
Language matters, and we cannot be free or contextually self-determining without communications that reflect or most fundamental obligations to others.
If we want to protect democracy our companies have to build it through the creation of actual power relations by starting at birth and, in the name of intergenerational justice, targeting key bad actors who lied about impacts while making their money at cost to children and animals.
They owe that money because they used fraud and unfair competition, omitting deadly costs in their public impact statements, in order to make it.
The climate crisis creates a serious problem for anyone claiming to do good public interest work. What’s public interest about a system that will result in the deaths of millions of innocents as heat waves grow?
Those funding public interest work – the wealthy families at the beginning – were not using a system that ensured their wealth reflected true 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. They did this while benefiting from the appearance of inclusive and functional democracies, while the average vote was actually being diluted by inequitable growth to uselessness. A system of fundamental entitlements likely to kill millions of innocent persons, one that could instead have achieved better outcomes by actually investing in children, is generally considered a failure.
Wealthy funders in the U.S., for decades, used a clever sleight of hand to benefit while forcing costs on others in ways that would ensure the crisis. They objectified the problems they seemed to be fixing, treating things like one’s share equity in democracy as “population,” a thing outside of subject-subject relations of a “we the people.” Note that Fair Start still uses the word in some areas as the only means of having audiences link from what they were taught to our work, though this could wane.
They started by assuming entitlements in ways that benefitted themselves at deadly cost to others. Fair Start activists themselves had made similar assumptions, about the authority that officials like judges claimed, in the former employments these activists held. In fact judges, and all officials, like those private citizens claiming to own wealth, must derive their authority back to actually empower those constituents they claim to represent.
Where else would their authority derive from?
Fair Start activist have had to deal with many seeking to sabotage our work, including fundraisers who made a lot of money making those false assumptions and urging us to do the same in order to get funding. She urged us to seek as charity what is owed as reparations – in violation of the dignity of human rights, and to not criticize the funders from whom she wanted business, even when they were making false claims about their impacts.
Alternatively, we’ve dealt with grassroots activists who insisted on having no obligations to empower even their own future children, even when doing so was necessary to live consistent in their impact claims and activism, and to be accountable for promises made to vulnerable communities.
That thinking, from philanthropists and activists alike – not caring about the future and the most vulnerable – is what fundamentally caused the crisis.
We can’t get to justice, legitimacy and obligation to follow the law, from injustice.
How did that system fail?
World leaders had privatized freedom in the birth-creation of political relations after 1948 by conflating the act of having and not having children under a singular umbrella of autonomy, rather than treating the former as requiring political equity for the child. This led to measuring / assessing and reporting based on standards meant to take oneself out of one’s birth and development context, ensuring children of color were treated as deserving less and placing them at increased risk.
At bottom, leaders used family law to slowly subvert all other civil rights reforms, training us to think of ourselves / the body out of context. If you ask anyone claiming to do good to account for children having entered the world, and entering now, this constant undoing relative to children’s rights can be shown.
We are building the Fair Start Movement to watchdog what has happened and who should be held accountable. Many are hiding birthright white supremacy and massive death debt with a fraudulent assessment and reporting standard that takes the self out of positionality and creation context because to talk about ourselves relative to children entering the world will show our reproductive rights systems assume children of color are worth significantly less and are dying in growing numbers.
Fair Start activists, in their work with nonprofits, assisted in creating a fantasy world of positive impact – through things like the promotion of vegan brands – that never existed if one were to account for children entering the world. This fantasy world allowed the slow conversion of democratic relations into the commercial ones we see today, often through a shell game that used concepts – like an abstracted version of animal liberation undone every day by growth – designed to hide positionality.
How do we watchdog?
We use the Tell The Truth and Act Campaign, in which we urge all to admit our work is being undone every day as children enter the world in conditions that violate their rights, and that violating children’s overriding birthrights to political equity has done more harm to our missions – all of our missions – than we have done good.
We ask all to admit their work was based on a separate but equal system of family entitlements that subverted the civil rights and anti-apartheid movements. And we then require contextualized impact claims, with neutral fact checking. We focus on the combined suffering of infants and animals, and specific disclosures contrasting impact claims with children entering the world without equitizing rights, beneath the line of their entitlements.
We ask: How much was good was undone by inequity, how far were the ecological baselines degraded, and how disenfranchised were the actual voices? That is the measure for what is owed under equity reparations, and if we take our values seriously we will use them to form subject-level relations with others as equally empowered, not just subject-object relations that derive from the failure of reproductive rights ignoring children’s rights.
Certainly, they have already received the benefits.
If they do not they are frauds, willing to benefit at deadly cost to others, and they deserve the same level of protection as they choose to give. Where else would any obligation to them come from?
Legally, those benefitting at deadly cost can be held accountable because nations cannot create their own standards for what constitutes harm in order to hide liability.
Under those narrow conceptions legal systems neither had the capacity to benefit animals, nor be representative of their constituents. Under the preemptive standard discussed in the articles below, we have a right to the truth about their on-balance impacts, and what they might owe to truly do what they got credit for claiming to do.
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.
We can ensure the needed resources to save lives by using the extreme wealth in the world today made at cost to others to fund reparative justice, because that wealth 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 and fraudulent messaging that hides their liability and the entitlement systems ensuring the death of millions as the climate crisis accelerates.
We can overcome the fraudulent withholding of reparations, withholding that uses a historically racist and unsustainable model – not benchmarked to actual harm – that illegally bypasses children’s rights as the basis for reproductive rights and intergenerational justice. This is an arbitrary model, a limited view of reproductive autonomy that simply assumes children of color are worth less in terms of the birth and development conditions they deserve. That assumption will now condemn millions of children, mostly of color, to death as the climate crisis intensifies.
Fair Start outs those using the fraudulent standard, which is inherently omissive, by simply asking targets to account for the entry of children into the world relative to things like the Children’s Convention when making impact claims and to adjust their claims accordingly.
The results are often shocking, with many public interest organizations having spent more on lavish travel, events and other performative things than on furthering their mission. Fair Start then assists communities impacted by the fraud to seek clawback reparations. We can focus on the specific harm from the fraud itself as a trimtab lever, and linguistic model of admission and reconciliation, to create larger systemic change and the physical constituting of legitimate relations through accurate language of obligation and the changes in behavior that follow it.
The funds from this process can drive changes in the existing sexual health and reproductive rights field, which has failed, changes that would treat mothers and infants as the priority class among vulnerable entities under existing child welfare / civil rights laws.
Without accurate language obligation is not possible.
An analogy?
All life occurs on a floor defined largely by the conditions in which we are born and raised. That floor is falling apart, and some want to keep going while others fall through. These free riders threaten us all. Why? It is physically impossible for any of us to be relatively self-determining – to be free, if we cannot ask for truth and then assure that persons are created, developed and emancipated in ways that offset equally their capacity to influence political systems, 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.
Please consider making a contribution through Donate. Together, we can create lasting change to save next generation
Fair Start reforms would ensure the things those who love freedom care about.
Eliminating entrenched and ineffective governments who survive by wasting tax dollars
Ensuring responsible parenting that halts the sea of child abuse and neglect which exists today
Ending unsustainable and universal growth models that are intended to ensure cheap labor via constant migration
Ensuring the protection of rights to bear arms consistent with governance by constituents who trust one another
And creating truly self-determining lives and relations that evade the need for climate migration, and are consistent with national security, etc.
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.
Our obligations to fund that accounting come before anything we do because it ensures fundamental justice; it creates the inclusive and empowering “we.” Without this we can’t choose who has influence, and control, over us. We can’t be free.
Around the world women and girls are abused, trafficked and killed.
Climate reparations are a chance to change that, giving many women and girls significant savings accounts that they can use to get away from their abusers – money that they can use to ensure any children they might have one day become truly free.
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.
Our obligations to fund that accounting come before anything we do because it ensures fundamental justice; it creates the inclusive and empowering “we.” Without this we can’t choose who has influence, and control, over us. We can’t be free.
