The article is very thought provoking. Dan Denning uses a wide brush. To carry the analogy a little further, - to appreciate such painting, one has to vary the viewing distance.

Historically, all civilisations have been underpinned, or sustained by a set of beleifs and their corresponding rules. In other word, they have been upheld by a set of perceptions, or a set of "world view" existing at a given stage. It is not so much coercion, more of tacit acquiescence from everybody. Humans are constantly searching for patterns in understanding.

In the past, these perceptions have been replaced by a set of improved perceptions, or a set of improved organising and communicating ability. The "world views" existing in the past have invariably been replaced by violent external forces, often with the help of internal and gradual dissatisfaction with the existing state of affairs. Later, as during the French Revolution, the transition to an improved world view happened by internal, but nevertheless violent forces.

Various forms of markets have been with humans from the year dot. The present day "market", especially the "market" for currencies, somehow crept upon us to such degree that it is regarded as almost sacrosanct. As pointed out in the article, it is not free, in the sense that it is hardly understood by anyone. It is not transparent. Participating in it is very restricted. It cannot be controlled. It resembles the Mathematical theory of Chaos, in as much as, the large scale pattern may be influenced by large scale intervention, but the overall pattern cannot be predicted or controlled.

Because of the turmoil it is causing to so many people, there is immense dissatisfaction with the current "world view".

What can be done?

Whatever is going to happen, a new paradigm is going to evolve, hopefully, without major violence. It could happen in Australia that has a healthy tradition of scepticism in the status quo. Or it could develop in the perceived bastion of free enterprise itself.