I try and talk economics in the Eurogroup, which nobody does," Yanis Varoufakis recounted after his brief tenure as finance minister of Greece in 2014-2015. "It's not that it didn't go down well-it's that there was point blank refusal to engage in economic arguments. Point blank." 1 This confessed culture shock by an academic suddenly thrown into the midst of professional politicians at the height of an unprecedented crisis within the European Union unveils, perhaps, a certain political naiveté as much as it reveals the diplomatic disadvantage at which Greece, which he represented, then stood. Yet it also highlights that the sovereign debt crisis within the Eurozone was not only, or even mainly, about the economy: it was about politics, institutions, and solidarity. If anything, it put the lie to the usual mantra that managing a public debt, and public finances more generally, is a matter of technical expertise best left to those who know the laws of economics. Experts, it appeared, made decisions which were no less political than that of others. This is not to say that the problem was to let politics enter the management of an economic problem, somehow distorting the "pure" economics of a solution. This is not to say, either, that public debt is only politics, and that its economic parameters could only yield to political will. It is to say, however, that public debts are inherently political objects as much as they are economic. The Greek crisis did not inject politics into an economic domain that gently hums in the background in fair weather. It unveiled how political public debt always is, even when it is not the focus of political debate. For public debt raises issues about the distribution of power and resources within and across societies, revealing as well as enhancing transfers of liabilities between social groups and generations.
IntroductIon vi INTRoDUCTIoNThis book sets out to explore exactly this political nature of public debt, both domestically and internationally. While public debt is a financial transaction-creating a relation between (mostly) private investors and a sovereign body (the former lending money to the latter, who pledges to repay the principal plus interests in a more or less distant future)-it is also, and inseparably, an instrument of power, a social relationship, and a political arena in which interests and values collide. 2 Public debt binds together major political issues, such as the power of the state to tax and spend, its legitimate role to regulate markets, and the social distribution of collective resources between bondholders and taxpayers. Drawing inspiration from the "new fiscal sociology" and the renewed interest of political historians in economic matters, this book aims to grasp public debt issues in all their dimensions, be they economic or political, legal, intellectual, social, or moral. 3 For we need this kind of "total history" to understand why our present is so deeply framed and impacted by public indebtedness.