Answer:
opposing the collectivization of land
Explanation:
The Kulaks were the peasants that were the most prosperous, that new and put in a lot of effort to develop their land, gain more land, and become wealthier because of it. The Soviets though didn't fancied this, as their policy was that everyone should have the same amount of land, and that collectivization should be done to the land. The Kulaks of course opposed this, as they worked very hard to develop and buy their land and cattle, and now they had to give it up tot he others that were less capable than them just because Stalin ordered so. Stalin was not a man that liked to be opposed, so in order to perform the collectivization without any problem, he ordered the deportation and elimination of the Kulaks. The end result was millions of people ending up dead, which were also the most capable people in the rural areas, and that made a big long-term damage to the agriculture and economy of the Soviet Union.
Answer:
a small government
Explanation:
the rest are advantages of bureaucracy
Answer:
<h2>Thanks for the points too much</h2>
Similarities:
Both empires emerged in the 14th and 15th centuries as postclassic civilizations building on the innovations of earlier political powers but expanding to greater extents
Both empires were entirely infantry, but well supplied, well-organized, and extremely aggressive and militaristic. Javelins, slings, spears and maces were used in battle.
Both empires had inherent instabilities
Both empires were fueled by corn.
Both empires have little to no seafaring, and instead stuck to the mountains and valleys in the center of the region.
Both empires conquered hundreds of cities in the region that resented their rule and taxation
Both empires were ended by Spanish invasions that capitalized on native divisions, introduced disease, and Spanish technology of guns, horses, and steel.
Both empires are misnamed-the Inka was the ruler of Tawantinsuyu, and the Aztecs adopted the name Mexica.
Both empires provided public education
Both Atahualpa and Moctezuma decided against confronting the Spanish militarily, allowing for the Spanish to take the Emperors hostage.
Attempts to restore the monarchy came after the capture and death of the emperor, but were too late.
Differences:
The Incas were bronze age, Aztecs were stone age
THe Incas assigned governors and shuffled conquered peoples around. There was a greater centralization than in Mexico
The Aztecs were a tributary empire, not a direct one.
The Aztecs had writing, while the Incas used Quipu
The Aztecs still had many rivals left unsubdued
The Inca used mostly potatoes while corn was far more dominant in Mexico.
The Inca had llamas, small but important livestock that made transport easier
The Inca had a sophisticated courier system of Chasquis along state-maintained roads
The Inca used bronze axes and halberds, with slings and maces as their main weapons alongside spears. The Aztecs used obsidian swords and glaives instead for close combat, and used javelins far more. Likewise, while Inca military relied on the unit’s experience and officer corps for their quality like the Romans, the Aztecs instead had a feudalistic division between the elite knights and commoners, with advancement by taking captives.
The Inca allowed women into their schools but not commoners. The Aztecs prohibited women but allowed for peasant men to also gain an education.
The diseases that destroyed the Incas came before the Spanish actually arrived in Peru, while the Spanish had been in Mexico for months before the plagues killed the emperor and populace.
Moctezuma’s mistake was trying to use generosity to awe the Spanish and try to coax them on his side, while Atahualpa’s was trying to awe them with his army rather than actually using it.
The Inca political crisis was a civil war between two brothers, while the Aztec’s was a three way duel between the King, the Priests, and the Aristocracy and military.
Answer:
¨ Unearthed in 1945 by a group of Egyptians digging for fertilizer, the so-called Nag Hammadi codices were one of the most important manuscript discoveries of the twentieth century for the study of religion in the late ancient Mediterranean world, particularly formative Christianity and Judaism.¨
Explanation:
