Deconstruction of Extreme Volatility

If we examine financial neo-modernist theory, we are faced with a choice: either accept the mainstream view of the risk component of volatility or conclude that volatility, somewhat ironically, has objective value. Thus, an abundance of situations concerning the fatal flaw of volatility vs risk classes exist. In utilising automated complex event processing, systematic funds effectively affirm the use of pseudo-intelligent simulacra - "robotraders"; as algo trading matures into the realm of 10,000:1 for peak second spikes we have entered a post-time - and certainly post-information - age which deconstructs fundamental financial realism.

The characteristic theme of critiques of algo trading discourse is the role of the market participant as market mover. In a sense, the term ’financial realism’ denotes not deconstruction as such, but subdeconstruction - in many respects wide fluctuations and extreme volatility are a result of the failures of demand management across multiple asset classes during high frequency trading. With there being no practical limit to volume spikes, and the subsequent futility of modernist objectivism intrinsic to many trading strategies, we can say that many (most?) funds do not understand the new trading ecosystems - and perhaps even lack the language to articulate such an understanding.

It need not be so, in other difficult areas of human endeavour new ways of thinking are emerging - see "Lethal Theory" by Eyal Weizman - and in this forum we will try to move this forward in our areas of interest.