A secondary-source excerpt (about 100 words) explains that European conquest often relied on alliances with local elites and the recruitment of indigenous soldiers, but it also sparked new forms of resistance, including rural guerrilla warfare, labor strikes in colonial ports, and petitions by Western-educated professionals demanding legal equality. The author concludes that resistance was not uniform and ranged from armed revolt to constitutional activism. Which development best supports the author's conclusion about the diversity of anti-imperial resistance?
- The complete absence of indigenous participation in colonial armies
- The Sepoy Rebellion and later Indian National Congress campaigns for reforms and representation (correct answer)
- The decision by European states to end all colonial taxation in response to petitions
- The abolition of missionary education to prevent the spread of constitutional ideas
- The refusal of colonized elites to cooperate with colonial administrations under any circumstances
Explanation: The author's conclusion about the diversity of anti-imperial resistance is best supported by the example of the Sepoy Rebellion and Indian National Congress campaigns. The Sepoy Rebellion of 1857 represents armed revolt against colonial rule, while the Indian National Congress, founded in 1885, exemplifies constitutional activism through petitions, reforms, and legal demands for representation. This example perfectly illustrates the range of resistance mentioned in the excerpt: from violent uprising (rural guerrilla warfare) to peaceful political organizing (Western-educated professionals demanding legal equality). The Indian case shows how resistance evolved over time and took multiple forms depending on the actors involved, their resources, and their goals, supporting the author's argument that anti-imperial resistance was not uniform.