Explore the vast range of titles available.

The Soviet Union created a unique form of urban modernity, developing institutions of social provisioning for hundreds of millions of people in small and medium-sized industrial cities spread across a vast territory. After the collapse of socialism these institutions were profoundly shaken--casualties, in the eyes of many observers, of market-oriented reforms associated with neoliberalism and the Washington Consensus. InPost-Soviet Social, Stephen Collier examines reform in Russiabeyondthe Washington Consensus. He turns attention from the noisy battles over stabilization and privatization during the 1990s to subsequent reforms that grapple with the mundane details of pipes, wires, bureaucratic routines, and budgetary formulas that made up the Soviet social state. Drawing on Michel Foucault's lectures from the late 1970s,Post-Soviet Socialuses the Russian case to examine neoliberalism as a central form of political rationality in contemporary societies. The book's basic finding--that neoliberal reforms provide a justification for redistribution and social welfare, and may work to preserve the norms and forms of social modernity--lays the groundwork for a critical revision of conventional understandings of these topics.

This paper aims to examine the contents of professional architectural books on worker residential areas in the Soviet Union, analyzing proposals based on the Northeast China's experience during the First Five‐Year Plan. Despite sharing a common source for residential design, differences in regional and situational conditions result in diversity between China and the Soviet Union. By considering the plan for worker residential areas in Beijing and analyzing the case of the planned Beijing No. 2 textile factory in 1953, it can be concluded that China had already developed original residential planning ideas and methods during that period.

The Bolshevik Revolution marked a pivotal shift in Turkish-Russian relations, ending longstanding conflicts and fostering political and economic cooperation. Notably, economic ties flourished, benefitting Türkiye significantly. Emulating the Soviet Union's Five-Year Plan, Russian experts devised an industrialisation plan for Türkiye, focusing on agriculture and underground resources. The plan's execution, aided by Soviet loans, machinery, and expert labour, saw the establishment of Soviet-style facilities in Anatolia from the 1930s onwards. The transfer of Soviet expertise and technology played a crucial role in Türkiye's industrialisation, showcasing the substantial impact of the Soviet five-year plans on Turkish industry post-1928.

Why were some countries able to build \"developmental states\" in the decades after World War II while others were not? Through a richly detailed examination of India's experience,Locked in Placeargues that the critical factor was the reaction of domestic capitalists to the state-building project. During the 1950s and 1960s, India launched an extremely ambitious and highly regarded program of state-led development. But it soon became clear that the Indian state lacked the institutional capacity to carry out rapid industrialization. Drawing on newly available archival sources, Vivek Chibber mounts a forceful challenge to conventional arguments by showing that the insufficient state capacity stemmed mainly from Indian industrialists' massive campaign, in the years after Independence, against a strong developmental state. Chibber contrasts India's experience with the success of a similar program of state-building in South Korea, where political elites managed to harness domestic capitalists to their agenda. He then develops a theory of the structural conditions that can account for the different reactions of Indian and Korean capitalists as rational responses to the distinct development models adopted in each country. Provocative and marked by clarity of prose, this book is also the first historical study of India's post-colonial industrial strategy. Emphasizing the central role of capital in the state-building process, and restoring class analysis to the core of the political economy of development,Locked in Placeis an innovative work of theoretical power that will interest development specialists, political scientists, and historians of the subcontinent.

Nothing differentiated the Soviet Union from the other two totalitarian dictatorships more than its economic policies. The Russian economy recovered fairly quickly from the devastation wrought by three years of world war and three more of civil war. In many cases, all that was needed to resume agricultural production was the return of peasant soldiers to their fields. The First Five‐Year Plan initially called for the collectivization of only 15 to 20 percent of all peasant holdings. When the people on these lands resisted, however, force was used against them and the whole process was accelerated. The First Five‐Year Plan called for gross industrial output to increase by 235.9 percent and labor productivity to rise by 110 percent. These pseudo‐scientific figures, however, were purely for show. The Fascist regime in Italy never created a complete and integrated economic program, but switched back and forth between differing policies.