Skip to content

WGlynn/BLM.net

Folders and files

NameName
Last commit message
Last commit date

Latest commit

 

History

1 Commit
 
 
 
 

Repository files navigation

BLM.net

Retroactive Reparations Protocol

A mechanism design framework for historical value attribution and restorative distribution for African Americans.

The Problem

Reparations debates stall on unanswerable questions:

  • How much? → No agreed methodology
  • Who qualifies? → Arbitrary cutoffs exclude legitimate claimants
  • Is it fair? → Political negotiation, not principled calculation
  • How do we know? → False precision hides real uncertainty

The Solution

Apply cryptoeconomic mechanism design to create transparent, defensible, self-correcting systems:

Mechanism Purpose
Dependency Graph Trace how modern wealth depends on historical unpaid labor
Pairwise Comparison Relative value assessment ("Was A > B?") instead of impossible absolute valuation
Fuzzy Mathematics Honest uncertainty (ranges) instead of false precision
Shapley Values Fair attribution based on marginal contribution
Fuzzy Set Membership Graduated qualification (0-1) instead of binary cutoffs

Core Insight

Value was created, not just extracted. Enslaved people didn't just lose wages—they built the foundation of American wealth. That value compounded for 160+ years. It can be traced. It can be attributed. It can be fairly distributed.

Documentation

Document Description
Retroactive Reparations Protocol Full whitepaper with mechanism design details

Key Principles

  1. Value Attribution, Not Guilt Assignment - This is accounting, not blame
  2. Living System - Updates as new historical evidence emerges
  3. Honest Uncertainty - Fuzzy numbers like "$500B-7.5T" instead of fake precision
  4. No Arbitrary Cutoffs - Partial documentation = partial share, not exclusion
  5. Measurable Completion - Ends when racial wealth gap closes, not politically

From Debate to Design

Traditional Approach:
  Political negotiation → Arbitrary numbers → Contested legitimacy

Mechanism Design Approach:
  Dependency graph → Pairwise comparison → Fuzzy aggregation →
  Shapley distribution → Transparent methodology → Updatable system

Relationship to Cooperative Game Theory

The Shapley value from cooperative game theory answers: What is each participant's fair share of jointly-created value?

Applied to reparations:

  • What was the marginal contribution of enslaved labor to American wealth?
  • Without that labor, how much less wealth would exist today?
  • That difference is the fair share—mathematically defined, not politically negotiated.

Contributing

This is a starting point, not a final answer. We invite:

  • Historians to refine the dependency graph
  • Economists to improve value attribution models
  • Mathematicians to advance fuzzy aggregation methods
  • Communities to participate in governance design
  • Policymakers to translate framework into implementation
  • Critics to identify flaws so we can fix them

License

MIT


"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice."

This framework is an attempt to bend it deliberately.

About

Retroactive reparations protocol – mechanism design framework for historical value attribution

Resources

Stars

Watchers

Forks

Releases

No releases published

Packages

 
 
 

Contributors