The irony of Samuel Adams' reaction to Shays' Rebellion and the agitating farmers lies in the fact that he had previously employed similar tactics and strategies himself during the struggle against British rule, advocating for the rights and grievances of the colonists. As a revolutionary leader, he mobilized public sentiment against perceived injustices carried out by the British government, often using agitation and protests.
However, when faced with similar unrest from the farmers in Shays' Rebellion, Adams took a much different stance. He condemned their actions and viewed them as a threat to the new government's stability, rather than as justified expressions of economic discontent. This shift demonstrates an inconsistency in his principles, showcasing the irony in his reaction to grassroots agitation when it originated from groups outside his favored causes.
Thus, the correct and most ironic option is:
Samuel Adams had used similar tactics and strategies against the British, and for similar reasons.