Fair Start reforms offer the most just and effective way to address many of today’s overlapping crises—but only if public-interest claims are evaluated using the right standard. Anyone claiming positive impact should be asked a basic question: How did your cost-benefit model account for children entering the world, and did it meet what those children’s legal rights, political equity, and national legitimacy require? In most cases, the answer is that it did not.
Children are typically treated as economic inputs driving growth, while the ecological, political, and human costs of that growth are ignored or illegally discounted. This produces “free” wealth that depends on worsening conditions – especially for children of color – and contradicts the values advocates claim to hold, such as safety, equality, and sustainability. The result is continued overshoot of ecological and social thresholds that both humans and nonhumans need to survive.
How is such a contradiction possible?
Between 1948 and 1968 world leaders effectively subverted the ongoing decolonial and racial justice movements with a human rights regime premised on a fraudulent standard: Autonomy or self-determination without the necessary condition of measurable political equity or empowerment. That fallacy fundamentally operates through an arbitrary and floating baseline present in almost all private and public cost/benefit modeling that illegally discounts future lives, and a universal but illegitimate reproductive rights regime devoid of children’s rights and political equity standards, which avoids applying limiting values to the birth-creation of power relations, and which has mostly protected long generations and growing concentrations of wealth.
Even a basic review of history will show women “liberated” by the United Nations “separate but equal” standard of treating having and not having children as a matter of personal autonomy (with parents taught to treat their children as means and not ends, generation after generation) now face dying in heat waves fundamentally driven by inequitable growth. Their predicament was worsened by low-impact social justice interventions, like attempts to eliminate greenwashing, that themselves used a definition of “green” and high permissible emissions geared to paltry early childhood development investments all meant to exploit growth and enrich the mostly white children of the funders backing the U.S environmental organizations, at deadly cost to millions of Africans.
The standard treated children, and thus future generations, as means rather than ends, and it ignored that persons not documents constitute nations, and almost inevitably through collective family planning efforts that ensure a minimum threshold of empowerment for all children. That threshold – a real border to replace the fictitious ones nations use today – enables consensual governance, avoiding each person’s loss of self-determination to the billions of others occupying and changing the planet. The real border makes consent possible.
Read more about threshold borders here, and to understand why Trump is a symptom and not the cause of all the harm he has done.
That wealth, which enables a form of white supremacy, was built by not having to be legitimated – by not having to pay the costs of child rights and equity, and thus legitimacy, and by ensuring unsustainable economic growth that has enriched a few at deadly and illegal cost to many, mostly children of color. The reproductive rights regime has lasted less than a few decades before causing catastrophic overshoot and degradation of multiple threshold conditions – ecological, social, and political – vulnerable children and animals need to survive and thrive, and it is impinging on the fundamental right of current and future generations to have children in safe and empowering conditions.
The Illegal Wealth Bubble Driving Outcomes
Today there is a massive wealth bubble at the top of our political and economic systems that derives from the use of a racist and fraudulent family policy, dating back to the standards that were set in human and reproductive rights regimes circa 948-1968. By privatizing reproductive rights, existing concentrations of wealth and power could maintain their entitlements, and could externalize their costs on the most vulnerable, at an existential level instead of legitimating political systems through child rights and equity-based creation of power relations. Instead of using bodily autonomy as the ethical basis of a right not to have children, and child equity as the basis of a right to have children, they used bodily autonomy for both. That eliminated all functional protections in the most influential stage of power relations.
This gutted racial justice and human rights / legitimation efforts – taking the key step out of the process. The move was – at the most fundamental level – illegal because under it there are no legal protections for / obligations to the most vulnerable: children are brought into conditions that violate their rights, with after-the-fact interventions and applications of rights, after adults have already gotten the benefit of exploiting them. This in turn threatens political legitimacy, inserting a false premise in which citizens have been expected to follow the law without actually being empowered by it.
The wealth from that growth now funds a legion of professionals – lawyers, academics (many of whom do not account for birth positionality and thus lose neutrality in their work), reporters/editors, campaigners, and paid fundraisers – who act as decoys creating a fantasy world of social justice undone daily by intergenerational and fundamental injustice
Many of these have tried to sabotage Fair Start reforms, in order to hide liability, and will be outed in the year to come.
These professionals protect and expand the wealth by omitting the countervailing impacts of children entering the world in conditions that violate the children’s rights and disenfranchise them, impacts that contradict the value assessments and public interest impacts the professionals claim.
Many benefit from this high-stakes birth lottery system, and then use their privilege to create the misleading appearance of solving it. Their lives are worth no more than the infants dying in the heat waves caused by the wealth bubble these professionals created.
Taking Action
That omission constitutes legally actionable equity and impact fraud (EIF) – using downstream and micro assessments and reporting to mask upstream and macro forces illegally enriching some at deadly cost to others. There is a preemptive right and cause of action to block EIF because governments authority derives from empowering those subject to it – and governments cannot redefine the object state of what it means to empower subjects just to avoid liability for the climate crisis.
Widespread use of the standard – and the discourse that situates (or constitutes) each of us in the intergenerational body politic – makes it physically impossible to limit the power humans have over one another, so that each person can be self-determining. Fair Start activists have witnessed multiple attempts by this professional class to hide collective liability for the deaths of millions as the climate crisis accelerates.
This is intentional reparations fraud, the attempt to skew the metrics for avoiding, and compensating for, untold climate-related and other deaths caused by illegal birth inequity and the growth it causes.
Use of the fraudulent standard – which derives from the maintenance of the racist “separate but equal” standard of the Twentieth Century, tucked away in reproductive rights regimes as a form of autonomy designed to gut political equity, is preempted by a variety of laws, and can be targeted as unfair competition under state law.
How? Because vulnerable entities and those who represent them, like TruthAlliance.Global – can’t compete with those who use the equity fraud model. Use of that standard constitutes the ongoing subversion of racial justice and other decolonial movements, and the hiding of collective liability for the deaths of millions as the democratic disenfranchisement and climate crisis.
Anyone can spot the standard of private benefit and public costs and its manufactured numbers using an AI-based XYZ analysis where claim X is assessed for how the cost/benefit modeling accounted for what children were owed as they entered the world (high levels of permissible harm v. self-determination, or zero), the largest factor altering the X claim to in fact be Z).
When confronted with these truths by TruthAlliance.global, many have just continued, hiding collective liability for the deaths of millions, and intentionally omitting the impacts of the largest driver.
If anyone used in their business or nonprofit work a valuation model premised on valuing as a benefit not hiring persons of color, they would be subject to civil rights injunction by state government. Using a model that generally enriches mostly white children at deadly climatological and other costs to mostly children of color, and doing so in part by disenfranchising them, is worse than a discriminatory hiring model, and is also illegal.
Constitutional discourse, about what we owe future generations, can bring change. For example, Fair Start is urging Paul Shapiro – an influential animal rights activist who helped defined policy for decades, now turned industrialist, to Tell the Truth about his impacts and to evade what many movement strategists see as the danger of interest convergence activism. Others are changing the world for the better by embracing the primacy of black birth equity.
Our work is having an impact. We pointed out that Wikipedia used the EIF standard in reporting the misleading impact claims of one environmental organization. Wikipedia retaliated by deleting the Fair Start Movement page, hiding liability for low editorial standards that have exacerbated the climate crisis, and that hide editors’ individual conflicts of interests.
But taking our claimed values seriously, ensuring a future defined by them, requires fundamental change and not lying about one’s impacts while quietly undoing them for personal benefit.
Total liberation lies not in top-down power, constitutions that do not empower people, and disconnected leaders drawing fictitious borders on maps, but in decentralizing power through collective reproductive rights systems that are based on love – and proven by ensuring measurable political equity for all children and thus national legitimacy.
Fair Start – which now operates mostly as a limitless network of whistleblowers targeting those above them – is intent on showing EIF as the fundamental driver of the crises we face today, and preempting it at the federal level in the United States by 2028 via specific grassroots, legal and corporate reforms to ensure the United States (which has had a disproportionate impact using the standard to undercut freedom around the world) and other nations begin to fundamentally legitimate. This entails moving illegitimate wealth to save countless innocent lives as a fundamental form of universal resistance to oppression.
TAKE ACTION: Back TruthAlliance.global and this simple truth: No Child is Worth More Than Another. For our supporters we urge specific avenues – Take action: 1) Become a whistleblower and grassroots organizer with Truth Alliance, 2) demand truth and reconciliation with our Tell the Truth campaign, 3) urge your attorney general or other law enforcement to seek a “legitimacy injunction” blocking use of the standard, and 4) back legitimacy certification for those who come forward and are willing to change accelerates.
One solution? Ensure a preemptive, legal cause of action for constitutional equity, starting with preempting the state law standard for basic consumer fraud cases, and moving into civil rights and constitutional litigation to elevate the primacy of black birth equity:
We will style the first suit as unfair competition on behalf of the Truth Alliance (TA) coalition. At base that coalition means admitting in truth and reconciliation that not prioritizing political equity as a fundamental norm has done more harm to our world and values than downstream public interest interventions have done good.
While the litigation and policy work will cite positive law and authority, our position is that the fundamental legal authority is a grundnorm that measurably and equitably empowers the constituents of any legal system. Documents, like constitutions, do not constitute political entities. People do. And the authority for courts to set precedent around the “one person, one vote” standard for equal protection derives from and is conditioned in a primary rule of constitutional equity and empowerment, a requirement logically inherent in the phrase “We the people” and similar conditions premising constitutions, treaties, and other legal instruments.
Will you join the TA coalition?
It starts by simply bifurcating those into admit the above, and want change, and those who do not:
A sample engagement question:
_________’s claimed value add does not account for child inequity, and treating children of color as deserving of less, and disenfranchising them. That’s illegal, and a mistake that caused horrible outcomes that are undoing _______’s claimed value add, including allowing our governments to never actually empower the people they claim to represent.
For example______________
