Recently, a 2-month-old by was seriously injured when a 10-year-old girl dropped the baby on a tile floor, authorities in Florida said Monday, announcing the arrest of a 36-year-old woman who they allege instructed the child via the online video game Roblox on how to kill the infant.
Far away, UNICEF’s lead, Catherine Russell recently stated:
Children are the world’s most precious resource. There is no greater cause than championing their rights and wellbeing. I am committed to this cause with all my heart, and I am proud to join the UNICEF family.
Ask Russell – here – how UNICEF accounts for children entering the world without parental delay and readiness entitlements, and how that impacts what UNICEF claims to value, and claims to do? Would she admit children entering the world without the resources they need reverses much of the work UNICEF has claimed do to?
If she can’t say that children have an overriding right to a fair start in life that creates an authoritative demand to the wealth they and their mothers need, she’s hardly being legitimate or inclusive and empowering.
Wouldn’t – given the role of birthing in the climate crisis – that deprivation have done more harm than UNICEF did good? Is UNICEF really just backing a standard that uses children as economic inputs for growth?
Fair Start’s research suggest UNICEF is doing exactly that.
We ask these question because Fair Start, as the fundamental fraud and reparations watchdog, is looking for those choosing to benefit at deadly cost to others by not admitting that birth inequity has undone many claimed impacts, and instead moving towards requiring preemptive and liberating debt/reparations accounting, which encourages parenting delay, readiness, and equity for children as they enter and impact their ecosocial environments.
These questions can divide the world into the fair and unfair – create a true border of human freedom and obligation that can reset national borders from the inside out – and allow us to overcome influential and unfair barriers to self-determination.
A body of growing peer-reviewed research showed it was physically impossible to be free, or self-determining, without this reform because there is no system of values, including representative government, outside of relative positioning to the social and ecological state-of affairs that determine infant health, equitable positioning, and opportunity, without this accounting. 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 government and the wealthy.
That research also showed many organizations masking this fact with omissive claims of entitlement and impact, elevating their positionality in an illegal system operating in violation of child welfare laws rather than legitimating it, and often choosing to benefit their white kids at deadly cost to millions of children of color. Such entities and individuals – nonconstitutives or noncons – fall outside the protections of the scope of social obligation, and deserve as much protection and liberty as they ensure for children entering the world.
Concentrations of wealth and power, including philanthropic funders, in those nations most responsible for the climate crisis often use decoy institutions and individuals – media, nonprofits, universities, agencies, think tanks, celebrities, etc. – to create a fantasy world of micro-level social justice impact that hides liability for the macro-level forces undoing the impact.
Wealthy families in polluter nations use these low child welfare standards to undo upstream what they are pretending to do downstream – selling vegan products in growth markets that do more harm to animals than our sales do good, suing over immediate threats to endangered species that will go extinct long-run, centering children’s needs well after they arrive in the world and most of the damage is done, focusing on political candidates when their ability to represent is being slowly eroded.
The fantasy world ensures wealthy whites benefit at deadly cost to mostly persons of color. Not addressing birth and emancipatory inequity allows some to treat inherited wealth and other privileges as somehow magically outside of the democratic process, and to use it, their positionality, and growth to slowly disenfranchise the average voter.
One of those costs is violence. Nations using illegal violence to defend entitlements without being positioned to actually represent their constituents begets violence, like mass shootings, which usually target innocents rather than the wealthy families benefiting for the representative system.
We are now at a place where these families and their concentrations of wealth and power can use the wealth they made through the sustainability scam to attack the democratic process itself. The solution to this problem is to recognize that governments have no inherent authority, but only what is derived from and conditional upon them empowering their constituents, and that includes any authority to entitle wealth made at deadly cost to others that is partially owed in climate debt/reparations accounting. Inequity in one’s share in democracy is ineffective.
If you want a better future, find the most influential institutions and individuals engaged in entitlement and impact fraud – those who can be made prominent example of – and ensure they tell the truth and back accounting that legitimates their authority.
