Ours is not a drive for power, but purely a nonviolent
fight for India's independence. In a violent struggle, a
successful general has been often known to effect a
military coup and to set up a dictatorship. But under the
Congress scheme of things, essentially nonviolent as it is,
there can be no room for dictatorship. A non-violent
soldier of freedom will covet nothing for himself, he
fights only for the freedom of his country.
-"Quit India,"
Mohandas Gandhi
How does the evidence support the claim in this
passage?

It is a fact that proves that a historical military coup
ended in a dictatorship.

It uses examples contrasting violent and nonviolent
ways to remove a government.

It is a fact that links violence and dictatorships.

It uses examples that contrast generals and
dictators.