Question

which statement about the pullman strike is true? the pullman strike ended quickly because of negotiations by eugene v. debs and the american railway union. the pullman strike helped unions gain national support and led to legal protections for unions. the pullman company agreed to hire more workers and pay them more. the pullman company lost more money fighting the strike than it would have paid out by giving in to workers.

Explanation:

To solve this, we analyze each option based on historical knowledge of the Pullman Strike:

1. Option 1: The Pullman Strike ended quickly? No, it was a major, prolonged labor dispute involving federal troops, so this is false.
2. Option 2: Did the strike help unions gain national support? Yes. The strike (led by Eugene V. Debs and the American Railway Union) brought national attention to labor issues, increased public sympathy for unions, and highlighted labor’s struggles, so this is true.
3. Option 3: Did Pullman sign a harmony pact by refusing to give in? No—Pullman refused to negotiate, worsening tensions, so this is false.
4. Option 4: Did Pullman lose more money fighting the strike than it would have by giving in? Historical analysis shows Pullman’s intransigence (refusing to compromise) led to greater financial losses from the strike’s disruptions than settling would have cost, so this is false.

Answer:

The statement "The Pullman strike helped unions gain national support and led to legal protections for workers" (assuming the second option’s accurate phrasing, as per historical context) is true. If the options are labeled (e.g., A - D), the correct one is the second option (e.g., B. The Pullman strike helped unions gain national support and led to legal protections for workers).

(Note: Based on the image’s text, the second option likely corresponds to this historical truth about the Pullman Strike’s impact on unionization and labor rights.)