Final answer:
The British system of indirect rule in India did not require mass support as it relied on maintaining existing elite power structures. Nationalists were divided between those who supported violent resistance and those advocating for peaceful methods, with the ultimate common goal being Indian independence.
Step-by-step explanation:
The rule that did not require support from the Indian masses was the system of indirect rule imposed by the British during their colonization of India. This system worked by aligning British interests with those of existing elite power structures, effectively minimizing the need for broader support among the general population. Indian nationalists were split into groups; some favored violent resistance, while others, like Mahatma Gandhi, advocated for peaceful resistance and nonviolent methods.
Direct rule, on the other hand, was employed in regions where local rulers resisted colonization. In these cases, traditional leaders were removed, and the British administered areas directly, often leading to conflicts within Indian society. Regardless of the form of governance, resistance movements from groups like the Indian National Congress sought to end British rule and achieve independence through various means, one of which was promoting self-rule or Swaraj.
During the struggle for independence, figures like Bal Gangadhar Tilak emphasized immediate independence and self-rule rights, whereas the British continued to modify their control through reforms and increasing Indian representation in government to quell dissent. Despite these measures, the desire for complete independence remained strong amongst Indian nationalists.