And as time passes the irrational is widening

The observer is struggling to make sense. Since summer 2007, beginning of the "sub-prime" crisis, it was agreed to denounce "the markets", driven by the single "greed" ("greed" in French), speculators, and irresponsible. Even organized large planetary ceremonies, in London, and then in Pittsburgh to think their regulation, their discipline, their release under supervision. Our President of the Republic, during all these years, has continued to stigmatize the immorality of financial capitalism. But for three years, nothing or nearly has been done for regulation. On the other hand, States themselves are massively indebted both to bail out the markets and deal with the consequences of the crisis on their economies.

Surprise in reading the comments on the euro crisis and the devaluation of the sovereign debt at the end of last week! Each tell us that the "markets have become rational" when others explain that grace "to the markets", and even to Lloyd Blankfein, the pattern now despised Goldman Sachs, Europe has made an unexpected step towards federalism. This: markets that, yesterday, were vilified, embodied evil, abruptly returned what they were before the crisis, human beings rational, whereas the indebted States which cease debt (even if it is to save "the markets") would be pathetic in their inability to reform itself other than the pressure of the market. Decidedly, Oliver Stone's Wall Street II, is late to a crisis. In the match against State civil society, civil society marks a new point. All seems back in order. If the previous round had turned to the States, it looks for civil society. Speculators suddenly disappeared and the convictions of the States became inaudible. Virtue has changed sides.

Such reversals puzzled Persian that I am. And who would like to forge a judgment that is not only the retrospective the last comment quotes. Difficult in it to distinguish between the goal - which would be the real laws of the economy and may explain the behavior of the players - and the subjective. Because, with the markets, the objective overlaps in the subjective: the imagination, the projection in the future, belief and expectancy are the value of the assets and rely on representations of the world which are granted more or less confidence. We are in a world where the value of the values depends on the faith placed in some fictions. Need for as much as the expression of a fundamental law instant appreciation of this or that actor about the ability of a State to honour its debt Does give an Angel character to the action of the markets that compel States to do what they would do without them (establishing the economic government of the eurozone that the treaties have not provided)

The reality is probably more prosaic. Can fear be somewhat despairing. There is reason null step part more in markets and in Governments. It is irrational. And as time passes, the irrational is widening. The players act less that they do respond, indefinitely, to their own reactions. Economic and financial history for three years is successive reactions to the reality created by the previous reaction, although none of the actors, be they public or private, States or markets, anticipate nothing. Walk backwards. Before the crisis, the States of the eurozone showed a budget deficit at 3 of GDP, as provided for in the Pact of stability (as long as the accounts were sincere). The deficits have exploded to cope with the crisis, pushing all the rules it was given. When this was done, everyone applauds the wisdom of the States that was face by measures to preserve the disaster. The markets themselves could only applaud as this was the condition to stop the value of the assets of ' collapse and found that color intensifies with growth. But they are the same which today derive their trust in the sovereign debt of some European States, which fear a domino, himself catastrophic effect. And if they can do, is that the observation of the conduct of European leaders taught that it obeys no another vision of the measures in the emergency which appear to be out of the crisis of the moment.

Between States and markets, the game is not unlike the theory of "double bind" (which is translated by "contradictory injunctions") developed by Gregory Bateson and the school of Palo Alto in the 1950s. Examples: "Be spontaneous" or even imagine a motorway sign which would be written "ignore this sign". Thus the markets seem to say to the States: save us, but you not endettez, and States in the markets buy our debt without appreciating it. Problem: the theory of the "double bind" was used to Gregory Bateson to explain how is schizophrenia. But that the Palo Alto school had not anticipated the dual situation where prescriber and prescribed to refer récipro-only of the contradictory injunctions. What seems to be the case in the current relationship between States and markets.

This is reminiscent to the Persian that they are not ready to get out of their crisis, and it would be to observe that, since three years, things are hardly to the best. An observation that he chooses to keep for himself, both Eastern wisdom indicates that beliefs, even unfounded, remain the best bulwarks against disasters.