Less state intrusion and violence, more free agents and movements of the marketplace – these are the paths toward fairness and away from corporate domination. The paternalism of supposed reform and regulation can only lead to more of the same.

The State intrudes to different effects. Repeal of Glass Steagall could be seen as less state intrusion, however it's repeal allows for the leveraging of deposits that leads to increased disparity. As long as people lend with interest, the more money you have, the more money you make. Without regulation, the ones that gamble most with deposits are those that can offer the lowest rates when times are good.

Would less paternalism mean the prohibition of lending, or certain types of lending?

Where coercive, political limits on exchange and property ownership are removed, avenues to self-sustainment and independence are thrown open to individuals, families and communities.

Where these limits are removed, avenues to fleece individuals, families, and communities are opened as well.

I would argue that the current disparity has less to do with these limits, and much more to do with the fact that they are not equally enforced upon all classes.