No, quite the opposite.
No, there was no advantage to being a peasant. The feudal system was designed to benefit the upper classes, not the lower. People did not choose to be peasants, they were forced into that role.
The Mongols gave strong support to the peasants and peasant economy of China, believing that the success of the peasant economy would bring in additional tax revenues and ultimately benefit the Mongols themselves.
King John did not benefit from the Magna Carter because he was a very biased man and if he signed it (which he did) he had to follow the law and he had to become fair and loyal to his people. And the barons (rich people) and average people benefited from this.
The Roman roads primarily benefited the Roman military and trade, facilitating the movement of troops and goods across the empire. However, rural peasants and lower-class farmers often did not benefit from these roads, as they were marginalized and had limited access to the economic opportunities that the roads provided. Instead, they faced increased taxation and exploitation as the empire expanded, leading to a disparity in the advantages gained from the infrastructure.
It will give more men and more resources to fight enemy.It also creates a psychological effect on enemy that russia is not alone and enemy has to fight also with russian allies.
they had fewer rights
Because why would a peasant willingly give up his/her grain? Here it is in a nutshell: Look up agricultural collectivization and kulaks while you're at it. Stalin wanted to industrialize so one of the reasons he enslaved the peasants/land was to pay for industrialization. The money raised from the seized grain of the state farms paid for industrialization by being sold on the international market. Industrializing the country stalin claimed would benefit the soviet union.
No, there was no advantage to being a peasant. The feudal system was designed to benefit the upper classes, not the lower. People did not choose to be peasants, they were forced into that role.
the farmers
It was hostile toward the Catholic Church. It was unlikely to benefit them personally.
The Mongols gave strong support to the peasants and peasant economy of China, believing that the success of the peasant economy would bring in additional tax revenues and ultimately benefit the Mongols themselves.
Both peasants and slaves in Aztec society had limited rights and freedoms, such as not owning property or being able to move freely. Additionally, both groups were expected to provide labor for the benefit of the ruling classes, whether through agricultural work or serving in households or temples. Both peasants and slaves were socially marginalized and had little opportunity for social mobility.
To a point. If you take the three popular slogans as the promises ("Power to the workers, land to the peasants, peace to the peoples"), then workers did become the most celebrated and nominally ruling class, although the true power belonged to the Communist elite, army and secret police, the land was taken away from the landowners and wealthy peasants and converted into collective farms for all to work on and benefit form, though not to own, and Russia did pull out of WWI, but a bloody Civil War broke out immediately followed by years of Stalin's rule of terror.
Building nuclear reactors with plutonium fuels and Pu-Be neutron sources.
King John did not benefit from the Magna Carter because he was a very biased man and if he signed it (which he did) he had to follow the law and he had to become fair and loyal to his people. And the barons (rich people) and average people benefited from this.
benefit benefit benefit
Joseph Stalin had several different five year plans that were made to make the economy of the Soviet Union stronger. The first plan made the agricultural process run more efficiently and improved the lives of poor peasants. His second plan improved manufacturing for the country.