Why is the Samin movement considered moral resistance against state ownership?

Correct answer: Because it asked how one who did not create nature could be its owner

The direct answer is A. The Samin movement challenged state ownership through a moral argument: nature was not created by the colonial state, so the state could not automatically claim absolute ownership over it. This questioned the justice of replacing community use with government control. A is correct because it states the central ethical question. B is wrong because increasing teak trade would support, not oppose, the commercial forest system. C is wrong because the movement did not fully support Dutch rule. D is wrong because demanding labour from villages was a colonial practice, not the Samin moral argument. The movement shows that people resisted not only taxes and rules but also the idea that rulers could make nature their property by law. Memory cue: Samin resistance = moral question about ownership.