In recent years, he argues, “the whole efficient market theory, Washington consensus, free market deregulation system” was so dominant that it was somewhat like a “religion”. This gave rise to “regulatory capture through the intellectual zeitgeist”, enabling the banking lobby to swell in size and power.Or confusing ends with means? I used to work adjacent to a bunch of pointy-heads in an area of economic policy where this was exactly the issue: policy purity for its own sake, not for what it could deliver. And with the benefit of hindsight, what it failed to deliver. Naysayers didn't exist as they would never have been allowed through the door, critical or inquiring comments branded you an economic illiterate and therefore beneath contempt.
So I get just a very little feeling of schadenfreude when I read articles like the one above. In fact, I may get even a little bit sort of orgasmic. Yes!
And even moreso with this one.
Hat tip Peter Martin, noting that I would have used a social networking tool as required by the FT, but I don't got none.