Does Capitalist Divergence Really Matter?

Abstract

This concluding chapter reflects on whether capitalist divergence still matters in an era of global financialisation and hyper-globalisation. It reviews competing perspectives that downplay national differences by treating advanced economies as broadly liberal when compared with state-led systems, or by viewing global finance as an equalising force that increasingly disciplines all capitalist economies. It then contrasts these claims with scholarship that continues to emphasise durable national variation and debates over whether capitalism is best understood as discrete varieties or as variegated forms. Drawing on the book’s findings, the chapter argues that divergence among the four cases may appear modest from a broad historical perspective but remains consequential in everyday life. It illustrates this by linking differences in shareholder payout and corporate orientation to differences in employment security and unemployment trajectories, especially during and after the global financial crisis. At the same time, it cautions against idealising coordinated models by noting limits to wage growth and the role of labour market dualism, particularly for non-regular workers. The chapter concludes that capitalist divergence should not be dismissed because even incremental institutional and ideational differences can shape inequality and well-being in meaningful ways.