I think it is important to point out that the article is the product of a libertarian political think tank. I have also cited to FEE, occasionally (usually to avoid complaints about biased sources), so there is some merit to their analyses - in addition to bias. In this case, that bias is apparent. It is a broad consensus of economists that Smoot-Hawley was bad policy and very badly timed. But it was not the cause of the depression. Bank policies didn't help, but again, were not the cause of the depression. It wasn't government intervention at all, but speculation and cyclical business realities. Greed and corruption, mostly.
What was the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act of 1930 if not government intervention? As the article states the effects of the tariff and government regulations on banks which created banks to have bad policies caused the Great Depression. To a certain extent banks must engage in speculation. If they didn't they wouldn't make any loans.
The state can never straighten the crooked timber of humanity. I'm a conservative because I question authority. Conservative Revolutionary