The next point, always discussed, of course, is the search for the guilty. Here many gladly repeat something like “the crisis showed the inefficiency of capitalism.” Well, this is completely at odds with reality. The thing is that banks and the financial system as a whole are considered some kind of incarnation of “capitalism,” due to the extreme complexity and variety of instruments used there, the abstract nature of the activity, and the utterly abstract nature of profits in this sector. But if by “capitalism” one means a free market, then all the characters uttering words about “capitalism” should immediately smash their heads against the wall. Because there is almost no “free market” in finance, and especially in banking. Banking is one of the most heavily regulated industries, a kind of “remnant of socialism” in a relatively market environment. It is strictly regulated, and not so much by legislation as by direct directives of central banks.
However, it is quite enough that the state monopoly on money and the possibilities of manipulating it under the guise of “financial policy” are already a radical intervention in the economy—not to mention that it was only thanks to the state privilege of violating property rights that banks possess that the emergence of fiduciary media, regularly causing crises including the current one, became possible.
Of course, “excessive speculation” always precedes a crisis. However, speculation is far from the same as a free market. Speculation arises precisely where there is no balance that market coordination usually provides. If it is interfered with, as in our case, then, of course, speculation arises.