The 1930s saw two vast economic events: a unique crisis of global capitalism (Great Depression or Slump); and unparalleled transformation of an entire large-scale society toward socialism (Soviet industrialization). Via pervasive societal effects, enlarged state capacities, programmatic ideas, and popular readiness, each reset the future. The USSR transitioned from a rural to an urban-industrial society, borne by heavy industry; central state planning; coercive population politics; and a collectivist ethos. Elsewhere, governments adhered strictly to austerity and tariffs. Recovery was slow and uneven, driven by industrial restructuring, as historic heavy industry gave way to new electro-technical, chemical, and consumer-based industries, especially the automotive sector. There were two exceptions: Scandinavian Sweden, based in social democracy and Keynesian-like economic steering; and Germany, with a brutally centralist military Keynesianism, massively focused on rearmament. By destroying organized labor, coercively regulating labor markets, and coordinating an exceptionally concentrated German capitalism, Nazism dragooned society into recovery and war-preparedness.

This chapter examines the shift from almost total estrangement in the early 1920s to broad enmeshment in cultural, economic, and finally diplomatic exchanges in the early 1930s. While acknowledging the importance of converging economic and strategic interests, the chapter argues that images and ideas were also significant, particularly in defining the identities and trajectories of the two countries. It illuminates the divergence between American anticommunists who loathed the atheist Soviet dictatorship and the growing number of intellectuals, journalists, African Americans, and others who became fascinated by the Soviet experiment in social and economic transformation. It also analyzes the ambivalence of Soviet writers, cartoonists, and political leaders about the United States, which they harshly criticized for its imperialism, racism, and economic exploitation, but also admired for its energy, productivity, and advanced technology. The chapter closes with a discussion of how President Franklin Roosevelt disregarded a terrible famine in Ukraine and protests by Ukrainian Americans as he negotiated for the establishment of diplomatic relations.

Part II establishes the alternative law and political economy framework by unpacking the dynamics between politics and law in the process of China’s market reforms. It starts with describing the relationship between law and politics in constructing one of the primary mechanisms of macro control in China – China’s socio-economic development blueprint, the “Five-Year Plan.”

It then moves to a chapter-by-chapter analysis of the evolving roles of law during China’s market reforms, outlining a three-stage shift in the allocation of market governance authorities within the Party-state system through legal evidence.

Throughout this part of the book, the author examines the legal configurations of political-power dynamics through a systematic investigation of the vast body of market-related primary and secondary sources of law and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) documents that have been promulgated in China since the early reforms until the present day. This Part reflects how two functions of law – economic and political – have developed side by side, each supporting the other.

When the Communist Party of China announced a new government on October 1, 1949, the economy that government inherited was in shambles. China had been at war for over twelve years and much of the infrastructure of the country had been destroyed or badly damaged and prices were rising at 51 percent per month or 13,000 percent per year. The Guomindang government fleeing to Taiwan took much of the country’s foreign-exchange and gold reserves with them, along with many of the managers of the banks and industrial firms. Inflation and war left many of the businesses that stayed barely able to function even when their managers and technicians did not flee.