Ingawa kila mtu anakubaliana kwamba mgonjwa wa kibepari ni mgonjwa wa muda mrefu, uchambuzi wa jinsi tulivyofika hapa una utata zaidi. Wanaitikadi wengi wa mrengo wa kulia wanaendelea kuhubiri ubora wa ubepari, kama vile Rais wa zamani George W Bush alivyofanya katika hotuba yake ya televisheni tarehe 24 Septemba. Mtazamo wao ni kwamba misingi ya ubepari bado ni imara, na kilichotokea ni matokeo ya ziada na maamuzi mabaya. Katika maoni aliyoyatoa awali kwenye mkutano wa faragha wa kuchangisha fedha, Bush alilinganisha tabia ya Wall Street na mtu aliyelewa, ambaye sasa anakabiliwa na kichwa kizito cha asubuhi iliyofuata. Ingawa wanakubali uzito wa hali hiyo, wanaitikadi hao hutofautiana katika mwitikio wao. Wakati Bush na Katibu wa Hazina wake, aliyekuwa Mkurugenzi Mtendaji wa Goldman Sachs, Henry Paulson, wanapendelea misaada mikubwa ya Serikali, wahafidhina wengine wanaona msaada wowote wa Serikali kuwa jambo lisilokubalika, kama vile mwanasiasa mmoja (Mwakilishi Sam Johnson) alivyosema, kwamba ni kama kuingia kwenye njia ya ujamaa. Kwa upande wa kushoto, furaha yao inaonekana wazi. Kwa miongo kadhaa wamekuwa wakipinga masoko huru yasiyo na kizuizi, na sasa wanaamini kwamba kuku wa ubepari wamerudi kutaga, yaani matokeo ya kile walichokipanda yamewafikia.

Though everyone agrees that the capitalist patient is chronically sick, an analysis of how we got here is more controversial. Many right wing ideologues continue to preach the superiority of capitalism as former President George W Bush did in his televised address on 24th September. Their view is that the fundamentals of capitalism remain strong and that what happened is a case of excess and bad decision making. In remarks at a private fundraiser Bush had earlier compared Wall Street’s behaviour to someone getting drunk and now facing a hangover. Though accepting the seriousness of the situation such ideologues differ in their response, whereas Bush and his Treasury Secretary and former CEO of Goldman Sachs, Henry Paulson, favour large Government bailouts, other conservatives find any government bailout an anathema, akin as one politician (Representative Sam Johnson) stated, to embarking down the road of socialism. For those on the left their glee is palpable, having argued against unfettered free markets for decades, they now believe capitalism’s chickens have come home to roost.

Wanaharakati wanaona kwamba mgogoro huu una vyanzo viwili. Kwanza, tamaa na vitendo vya rushwa vya Wall Street; pili, utamaduni wa kuondoa kanuni (deregulation), ambao ulisababisha kanuni kukosekana kabisa, au kutokuwepo kwa usimamizi madhubuti. Suluhisho lao ni rahisi sana: kudhibiti utamaduni wa bonasi na malipo makubwa Wall Street, na kuimarisha kanuni na usimamizi.

The left see that this crisis has two causes. Firstly the greed and corrupt practices of Wall Street and secondly the culture of deregulation which resulted in either regulation being absent, or asleep at the switch. Their solution is very simple, crackdown on the bonus and remuneration culture on Wall Street and beef up regulation and oversight.

Hata hivyo, pande zote mbili, wale wa kushoto na wa kulia, zimekosea kubaini chanzo cha mgogoro huu. Ingawa zote zinataja utamaduni wa ulafi na usimamizi mbovu wa kanuni, zinajaribu kutenganisha jambo hili na ubepari, kana kwamba tabia iliyojionyesha haina uhusiano wowote na misingi mikuu ya ubepari. Lakini tamaa ya mali na kanuni zilizolegezwa ni muhimu kwa ubepari kama injini ilivyo muhimu kwa gari. Kutarajia kwamba ubepari unaweza kufanya kazi vizuri bila tamaa na utamaduni wa kamari wa kuchukua hatari kubwa ni sawa na kutarajia mbwa asibweke. Tamaa, kuchukua hatari kubwa na kuvunja sheria ndizo mafuta muhimu yanayoendesha mfumo mzima wa ubepari. Utamaduni wa benki nyingi za Wall Street na Jiji la London unathibitisha kikamilifu hoja hii. Zimejaa nguvu za kiume kupita kiasi, zinathamini sana tamaa ya mali, zinatarajia watu waishi ili kufanya kazi, si wafanye kazi ili waishi, na udhaifu wowote unadharauliwa. Kwa kuchochewa na mishahara mikubwa na bonasi za ajabu, utamaduni wa tamaa si tu unatarajiwa bali ni lazima ili mtu afanikiwe. Wafanyabiashara hawa wenye kiburi wa Wall Street na jijini wanajiita "Masters of the Universe" (Mabwana wa Ulimwengu). Hakuna mabishano makubwa kuhusu hili kwa maana kwamba watu wengi wenye busara wanaamini kuwa utamaduni wa kibepari unaotawala sekta ya huduma za kifedha unakabiliwa na ulafi, ndiyo maana kunapaswa kuwepo na kanuni madhubuti. Hata hivyo, hakuna kiwango cha kanuni kinachoweza kamwe kupunguza ubepari, kwa sababu zifuatazo:

However, both those on the left and right have misdiagnosed the causes of the crisis. Though both point to a culture of excess and regulatory mismanagement, they seek to detach this away from capitalism as if the behaviour exhibited was somehow detached from the core values of capitalism. But greed and deregulation are as essential to capitalism as an engine is to a car. Expecting that capitalism can effectively operate without greed and a risk-taking casino culture of high risk taking, is like expecting a dog not to bark. Greed, high-risk taking and bending the rules are the essential oils that drive the whole capitalist system. The culture in many of the banks in Wall Street and the City of London exactly proves this point. They are testosterone rich, they put a premium on material ambition, they expect people to live to work, not work to live and any weakness is frowned upon. Fuelled by their high salaries and extraordinary bonuses, a culture of greed is not just expected but is obligatory if one is to succeed. These arrogant Wall Street and city traders call themselves “Masters of the Universe”. There is little controversy over this in the sense that most reasonable people believe the capitalist culture that dominates the financial services industry is prone to excess, which is why there must be effective regulation. However, no amount of regulation can ever mitigate capitalism, for the following reasons:

1. Kwanza, ugumu wa baadhi ya bidhaa za kifedha zinazouzwa umeongezeka kwa kasi kubwa. Wasimamizi wa sekta, hata katika nyakati bora, si miongoni mwa taasisi zenye wepesi zaidi. Katika dunia ambayo ubunifu wa bidhaa ni wa haraka na unabadilika kila wakati, wasimamizi hujitahidi kuendana na mabadiliko hayo. Ujuzi wao na uwezo wao viko nyuma sana ya wale wanaowasimamia, kiasi kwamba wangeweza pia kulala muda mrefu asubuhi kwa kiasi cha manufaa wanayoleta siku nyingi.

1. Firstly, the complexity of some of the financial products being traded has grown exponentially. Regulators at the best of times are hardly the most agile of entities, in a world where product innovation is rapid and fast changing, regulators struggle to keep up. Their knowledge and capabilities are far behind those that they are regulating meaning that they might as well sleep-in on most days for all the good they do.

2. Pili, makampuni hulipa wanasiasa ili kuwazuia wasimamizi wa udhibiti (regulators) wasiwasumbue. Hii hufanyika kupitia michango ya kampeni na upendeleo mwingine. Mara nyingi hii huhakikisha kwamba wasimamizi wa udhibiti wanadhibitiwa. Lakini ikiwa fimbo hii haifanyi kazi, basi zawadi ya kazi zenye faida kubwa katika sekta binafsi huwa daima mezani. Kuna mzunguko usio wa afya wa watu kati ya wasimamizi wa udhibiti na sekta binafsi, jambo linalofanya mchakato mzima wa usimamizi kuwa kicheko.

2. Secondly, companies pay politicians to keep regulators off their back. This is through campaign contributions and other favours. This usually ensures regulators are kept in check. But if this stick doesn’t work, then the carrot of future lucrative work in the private sector is always on the table. There is an unhealthy revolving door between the regulators and the private sector which makes a mockery of the whole oversight process.

3. Mwisho, wasimamizi wa kanuni daima huitikia matukio baada ya kutokea, wakipigana vita vya jana. Kuongeza kanuni baada ya mgogoro mkubwa au kashfa ni jambo la kawaida, lakini kwa kawaida hakusaidii sana kutabiri mgogoro ujao. Kwa mfano, baada ya mgogoro wa Enron, sheria ya Sarbanes Oxley ilianzishwa. Ingawa ilileta faida kubwa kwa wahasibu na wataalamu wa kudhibiti hatari, haikuwa na msaada wowote katika kuzuia au hata kutarajia mgogoro wa mikopo ya nyumba ya subprime. Kwa hiyo, kujaribu kudhibiti ubepari hakuwezekani; ni sawa na kujaribu kupaka lipstick kwenye nguruwe, kama methali hiyo maarufu sana inavyosema.

3. Lastly, regulators are always reactive, fighting the last war. Increasing regulation after a major crisis and scandal is common, but is hardly relevant to forecasting the next crisis. For instance after the Enron crisis, Sarbanes Oxley was introduced which, though lucrative for accountants and risk specialists, was entirely useless in preventing or even anticipating the sub prime crisis. So trying to regulate capitalism is impossible, it is – using a now infamous metaphor - like trying to put lipstick on a pig.

Kinyume na inavyodhaniwa na watu wengi, dunia haingeisha endapo ubepari ungetupwa kwenye pipa la karatasi taka. Maendeleo, kuendelea mbele na teknolojia vyote vilistawi kabla ya kuanzishwa kwa ubepari wa kimataifa, na vinaweza kustawi tena. Hata hivyo, makuhani wakuu wa fedha za kimataifa bado wanakataa ukweli huu, wakiamini kwamba licha ya mgogoro wa mfumo uliopo sasa, ubepari utarejesha tena nafasi yake ya juu. Jambo hili lilirudiwa na George Bush katika hotuba yake ya tarehe 24 Septemba, ambamo alisema kwamba ubepari wa kidemokrasia bado ndio mfumo bora zaidi. Mwaka 2002 hotuba maarufu ilinukuu kauli ifuatayo, yenye umuhimu mkubwa kwa matukio ya leo: Kwa miaka mingi, uchumi wa Marekani umeonyesha uwezo wa ajabu wa kuvumilia mishtuko ya aina zote, kupona, na kuendelea kukua. Masoko yanayonyumbulika na yenye ufanisi kwa ajira na mtaji, mila ya ujasiriamali, na nia ya jumla ya kuvumilia na hata kukumbatia mabadiliko ya kiteknolojia na kiuchumi, vyote vinachangia uimara huu. Kinga muhimu sana katika mazingira ya sasa ni nguvu ya mfumo wetu wa fedha: Licha ya mishtuko hasi ya mwaka uliopita, mfumo wetu wa benki unabaki imara na wenye kanuni nzuri, na mizania ya makampuni na kaya kwa sehemu kubwa iko katika hali nzuri. Hotuba hiyo ilitolewa na Ben Bernanke – Bernanke yule yule wa nukuu ya ‘mashine ya kuchapisha noti’. Lakini Bernanke alikosea mwaka 2002, na Bush anakosea sasa; ubepari hauwezi kurekebishwa, unahitaji kubadilishwa.

Contrary to popular perception, the world would not end if capitalism was consigned to the waste paper bin. Progress, advancement, technology all prospered before the inception of global capitalism and they can prosper again. Yet the high priests of global finance remain in denial, believing that despite the current systemic crisis, capitalism will once again regain its lofty position. This was reiterated by George Bush in his address of September 24th in which he stated that democratic capitalism remains the best system. In 2002 a prominent speech cited the following statement which has significant relevance to today’s events Over the years, the US economy has shown a remarkable ability to absorb shocks of all kinds, to recover, and to continue to grow. Flexible and efficient markets for labor and capital, an entrepreneurial tradition, and a general willingness to tolerate and even embrace technological and economic change all contribute to this resiliency. A particularly important protective factor in the current environment is the strength of our financial system: Despite the adverse shocks of the past year, our banking system remains healthy and well-regulated, and firm and household balance sheets are for the most part in good shape. That speech was given by Ben Bernanke - the same Bernanke of the ‘printing press’ quote. But Bernanke was wrong in 2002 and Bush is wrong now, capitalism cannot be reformed it needs to be replaced.