Question

read the passage from sugar changed the world. the indian coolies and the ex - slaves, who resented these newcomers flooding into the colonies and driving down wages, were instant rivals. this was convenient for the planters—who were skilled at the game of divide and rule. the planters lumped their workers into two distinct but equally nasty stereotypes: former slaves were described as lazy, whereas indians were called meek, docile children. “you may have work and plenty of it for a black man and a coloured man, and they will not do it,” claimed planter w. alleyne ireland. he conveniently ignored the fact that the ex - slaves wanted to work their own land, not labor for their former owners. the overseers praised the indians meekness but also held them in contempt. the indian, one overseer claimed, “possesses the low, cringing and abject habit common to his nationality.” what evidence do the authors include to support the central idea that indian workers and formerly enslaved people became rivals? ○ anecdotal evidence that indian workers and formerly enslaved people were paid wages on different scales ○ empirical evidence that planters ignored the fact that formerly enslaved people wanted to work their own land ○ empirical evidence that planters tried to pit formerly enslaved people against indian workers to the planters advantage ○ logical evidence that indian workers and formerly enslaved people did not get along with one another because wages went down

Explanation:

To solve this, we analyze each option:

• Option 1: The passage doesn't focus on wage scales as evidence for rivalry.
• Option 2: The fact that ex - slaves wanted to work their own land is not evidence of their rivalry with Indians.
• Option 3: The passage says planters were skilled at "divide and rule", lumped workers into stereotypes, and the planter's quote (ignoring ex - slaves' desire to work their own land) shows planters tried to pit the two groups against each other for their advantage. This is empirical evidence (based on observations/real - world actions) supporting the rivalry.
• Option 4: The logical evidence about wages doesn't match the passage's focus on planters' actions to create rivalry.

Answer:

C. empirical evidence that planters tried to pit formerly enslaved people against Indian workers to the planters’ advantage