How did joseph stalin's collectivization policies affect the soviet union? a) they effectively destroyed stalin's cult of personality. b) they created mass starvation throughout the country c) they ended mass protests against stalin's government d) they forced the soviet union to accept aid from western europe

B) They created mass starvation throughout the country

Explanation:

The Soviet Union between 1927 and 1953 (the so-called Stalin Era or Stalinist Era) was dominated by Josef Stalin, often described as a totalitarian state, modeled on a leader who had all the powers, and who sought to reform Soviet society with planning aggressive economy, especially with a sweep of the collectivization of agriculture and the development of industrial power. He also built a huge bureaucracy, which undoubtedly was responsible for millions of deaths as a result of various purges and collectivization efforts. During his time as leader of the USSR, Stalin made frequent use of his secret police, gulags and almost unlimited power, to reshape Soviet society.

The rise to the definitive power of Joseph Stalin as secretary general of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union or Gensek between 1927 and 1929 marked the beginning of a radical transformation of Soviet society. In a few years the face of the Soviet Union has radically changed by the collectivization of land and the rapid industrialization of the many ambitious five-year plans.

This policy has resulted in millions of deaths due to the dramatic decline in the quality of life of citizens and has opened a long reign of terror and betrayal, marked in particular by the Great Expurgation and by a great expansion of the forced labor camps of the Gulags. Moreover, this policy will make the Soviet Union, after its victory against the Nazi invaders, the second world superpower. All of its later history, from Stalin's death (1953) until its dissolution in 1991 - the administration of the USSR will consist of the heavy inheritance of the Stalinist era.

the exact role and status of women in the roman world, and indeed in most ancient societies, has often been obscured by the biases of both ancient male writers and 19-20th century ce male scholars, a situation only relatively recently redressed by modern scholarship which has sought to more objectively assess women's status, rights, duties, representation in the arts, and daily lives; and all this from almost exclusively male source material dealing with a male-dominated roman world.

women in mythology

unlike some other ancient cultures such as the greeks who had formed a creation myth where woman was a creature secondary to man and, more specifically, in the form of pandora, a bringer of unhappiness and vices, the romans had a more neutral approach where humanity, and not specifically the male, was created by the gods from earth and water. ovid's metamorphoses, for example, does not specify whether the first human was a man or a woman. at least in a physical sense then men and women were not regarded as belonging to a different species as in the greek world, a view often reiterated in roman medical treatises.

the noble might have thought that the system was far because they had lot of things and riches and the serf would have thought that the feudal system was un fair because of the way they were treated.