Final answer:
Nonviolent, non-cooperation in a colonial context demonstrated the oppressive nature of imperialism by refusing to legitimize the colonial rule and revealing its reliance on force and subjugation.
Step-by-step explanation:
Nonviolent, non-cooperation as a form of resistance impacts imperialists by challenging their perceived legitimacy and humanitarian image. By refusing to participate in the imperial bureaucracy, serve as soldiers, or engage in any form of assistance, the native populations exposed the oppressive nature of imperial rule. The inherent violence and moral degradation underpinning colonialism were cast into stark relief when faced with the contrasting peaceful defiance of the oppressed.
The exploitation and harsh treatment, such as forced labor under brutal conditions, evidenced the cruelty behind the imperialist's economic motives. This form of resistance questioned the so-called 'civilizing mission' and tainted the image of imperial powers, revealing that their occupation was not benign but based on violence and subjugation.
Moreover, as natives rejected the jobs, education, and affiliations offered by their colonial rulers, they struck at the heart of the imperial administration, revealing to the world the lack of genuine human connection and the non-consensual basis of the imperial-human relationship.