Financialization is integral to capitalism, not a product of deregulatory excess

Evidence

But, while authors like Chris Hedges (2009) may associate these facts with the emergence of an “empire of illusion,” I believe there is more to be gained by taking ideas like “imaginary wealth” and “fictitious capital” seriously. So, too, do I believe that, in contrast to insightful authors like Matt Taibbi (2010), Gerald Epstein (2006) and Joseph Stiglitz (2010), financialization is something more than the excesses of a deregulated cleptocracy; like Costas Lapavistas (1999; 2013), Ben Fine (2010; 2012), John Bellamy Foster and Fred Magdoff (2009) and Greg Albo, Sam Ginden and Leo Panitch (2010), I see financialization and its current crises as symptomatic of and integral to the capitalist system of which it is a part. — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 34

Categorization

  • DEFINE: Positions ‘fictitious capital’ seriously versus ‘imaginary wealth’ framing by defining the analytical stakes.
  • corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 34
  • XREF: connects to: Deregulation let non-finance firms pursue financial activities, fueling debt expansion — Ken-Hou Lin & Donald Tomaskovic-Devey, Financialization and U.S. Income…, 40; Solutions to financialization require abolishing capitalism, not just re-regulating finance — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 34; Financialization means accumulation through financial channels rather than production — Greta R. Krippner, The Financialization of the American…, 11 (+10 more)

Broader Connections