What you choose not to do is often just as important as what you do.

When facing the 1987 stock market crisis, Greenspan did not introduce any special measures. If he had been required to submit a report on his actions, it might have been blank. But does that mean he truly did nothing? The line between action and inaction isn’t always clear-cut—is inaction simply the absence of action, or can it be a deliberate choice in itself?

Author: GUDORDI |  2025-01-22

The changes in Eastern Europe provide a good and rare opportunity to gain a deeper understanding of economic and peace issues. (Shutterstock)
Do market forces also follow Lao Tzu’s vision of the universe? (Shutterstock)
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Email

「天下皆知美之為美,斯惡已。皆知善之為善,斯不善已。
故有無相生,難易相成,長短相較,高下相傾,音聲相和,前後相隨。
是以聖人處無為之事,行不言之教;萬物作焉而不辭,生而不有。為而不恃,功成而弗居。夫唯弗居,是以不去。
──《道德經》,老子

在上回,筆者提到格林斯潘的名句:「流了很多額汗,但最後是什麼都沒有做 」,出自他對1987年股災危機的處理方法。據記載格林斯潘當年是至少一晚通宵沒睡,跟市場人士不斷保持聯繫,並預備了一個又一個的方案。有好幾次都已近乎出手,但最後都未有「按掣」,市場最終更是在不用聯儲局採取任何行動下,自行穩定了下來。

The Art of Winning Without Fighting

This case raises an intriguing question: Did Alan Greenspan actually do nothing during the 1987 stock market crisis? The fact is, he did not implement any extraordinary measures. If he were to submit a report detailing his actions, it might be blank. But does that mean he truly did nothing? What constitutes “action” and what constitutes “inaction”? Is the distinction always black and white?

This brings to mind a thought-provoking question from the renowned economist Armen Alchian: What is waste? If 100 ships are sent out to sea to search for missing survivors and only one succeeds, does that mean the other 99 were wasted? Likewise, how do we define “handling a crisis”? If a leader remains prepared to act at any moment, subtly guiding those involved to solve the problem themselves, and they ultimately succeed—does that not also count as an effective resolution? More importantly, which approach is superior?

Let’s take this thought experiment further. Suppose the Federal Reserve had been led by another individual—let’s call him “Greens”—who developed “The Eight Greens Strategies” and published a 500-page report defending them. Would this situation have been preferable? And if a financial reward were given to the person who best handled the crisis, who would be more likely to receive it—Greenspan or Greens?

Now, what if “The Eight Moves” were entirely unnecessary and actually worsened the situation? But because Greens spoke eloquently and convinced the authorities and the public that he had bravely defended the economy against a looming disaster, he was celebrated as a hero. Would he not then receive the reward, despite his interventions being counterproductive?

From this perspective, could it be that some officials, knowingly or unknowingly, manufacture crises or exaggerate their own contributions to advance their careers? And for society as a whole, do we need more leaders like Greenspan—or more like Greens?

The Power of the Indescribable and Imperceptible

These are not simple questions. The Tao Te Ching, quoted at the beginning of this article, reminds us that appearances can be deceiving. Over 2,000 years ago, Lao Tzu warned that the surface of things does not always reflect their true essence. “True goodness is not always obvious goodness.” Opposing forces often coexist:

“Existence and non-existence give rise to each other,
Difficulty and ease complement each other,
Length and shortness contrast,
High and low incline toward one another.”

In other words, achieving real success does not always require direct action. More often than not, the subtle, imperceptible forces at play are what truly drive progress. This is why great sages “act without striving” and “teach without speaking.” Even when problems are perfectly resolved, they do not take credit—because success is rarely the achievement of just one person. A true leader does not seek recognition or vanity.

The Tao and the Market

It is also significant that the Tao Te Ching’s opening passage states:

“The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao.
The name that can be named is not the eternal name.”

The final lines of this famous passage add:

“Mystery upon mystery—the gateway to all wonders.”

From this perspective, the quote at the beginning of this article serves as an extension of this idea: that reality is often deeper than what is immediately visible.

Do Market Forces Follow the Tao?

The Tao Te Ching is essentially an exploration of the natural order of the universe and how people should position themselves within it. Its structure begins with a broad cosmic perspective, or what might be called an “ontology”—a fundamental understanding of how the world works.

Therefore, the book’s first sentence is a summary:

“The Tao that can be spoken is not the eternal Tao.”

Everything that follows in the Tao Te Ching expands on this foundational principle.

From this viewpoint, the quote at the beginning of this article can be seen as part of Lao Tzu’s ontological philosophy, his understanding of the forces that shape all things. Could it be, then, that the emergence and operation of market forces also follow the same invisible yet pervasive forces described by Lao Tzu?

If so, then what is not done can be just as important as what is done.

So, when considering Hong Kong’s future, should we focus only on what actions must be taken, or should we also reflect on the hidden forces already shaping events in ways we may not yet fully comprehend?

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top