There is a common point between these definitions. They deal with the same reorganization of relationships between market and state. This reorganization is dictated by a neoliberal ideology which is opposed to the Keynesianism that was so highly praised in continental Europe up to the end of the 1970s. While it is thought of as the guarantee of common good, regulation constrains the state to place itself at the service of the market. According to the author, it “guarantees and strengthens the competitive order” of the free market, to the detriment of other values such as social justice or solidarity. One it is cleansed of its semantic approximations, it becomes evident that the regulatory order is out of touch with the order of the welfare-state. It cannot be denied that there is an increase in inequality. “It cannot be denied that there is an increase in inequality, continues the lawyer. It is not just about saying that this is crippling the current system, but we can worry about the problem and ask the question as to what we can put in place to guard against these difficulties. For all that, I am not advocating a return to the welfare-state because, once again, it is not up to academics to make political suggestions. In any event, it is impossible nowadays, because the system is accompanied by an unthinkable nationalization of foreign debt crises. And globalization allows companies to relocate more and more easily which does not work in favour of a system that would impose strict fiscal pressure. We can therefore only take stock of the situation without returning to the past at the same time”.

A forgetful financial market

The work does not suggest an economic system and a turnkey legal framework. This is not the objective of the academic sphere but, balancing between general and specific cases, it makes it possible to establish good procedures and to prepare the groundwork for a series of mechanisms underlying the crisis. Multidisciplinarity placed at the service of a researched objectivity helps to reattribute meaning to over-used terms. Strengthened by a reinforced meaning, these concepts mark the transversal trends of the work. New observations known or suspected by many but scientifically replaced in context, among which the loss of sovereign states, a Europe that is suffocating and won over to the cause of Anglo-Saxon neoliberalism, the evolution of globalization, marketization and financiarisation of companies, the rush towards competition to the detriment of cooperation and use of the market in an exclusively short-term perspective. The whole thing can be summed up in two words: greed and bad faith. The bad faith of an ideology which disguises itself as a succession of rational facts and which smacks of amnesia. Or at least it smacks of selective amnesia which leaves behind its more human dimensions of cooperation and common interest.

While the researchers remain sceptical about a realignment of the situation, they suggest concrete ideas and frameworks of broader thinking. “Short-termism, immediate return on investment, has not always been the central idea of the market economy contrary to what some neoliberals may think recalls Nicolas Thirion. “The glorious thirty or Rhineland capitalism for example, were somewhat accompanied by a form of prosperity at a time when company managers considered that time should be left to its own devices, and investments put in place that could reduce the investments of shareholders”. Changing the system is today a utopian concept. This does not mean, however, that it cannot be made more human. Companies could be made to be something more than a financial product, a guarantee of common good, re-establish and encourage a long-term relationship between investors and entrepreneurs, reflect on the durability of means of production, a slowing down of marketization, renew principles of cooperation and solidarity. These are the great curative lines suggested by the researchers who nonetheless remain entirely realistic. “We were going to show no pity to the evil banks in 2008”, says the lawyer ironically. “We were going to separate business banks from deposit banks and not allow ourselves to be walked all over. In the end, reform is virtually non-existent. And in the short-term I do not see how things could develop any differently. Will it require another more serious crisis? Maybe there will be a revolt, or even a revolution. This is by no means certain. Marc Jacquemain, sociologist at ULg, already underlined this in a contribution on the relationships between market and state in 2007: the great paradox for mankind today is this schizophrenic tendency to work as a victim of Globalization while also being its accomplice consumer. There is apathy in the world and in its values. As researchers, we can try to preserve the urgent in the important, take the time and distance necessary to observe all the facts together. At the moment we might as well be throwing messages in bottles into the sea and there are no readymade solutions »