What is the purpose of the outside source used in this excerpt? to show how strongly the american president insisted japan participate in international trade to show how the japanese government isolated the country from trade with other nations to educate readers about traditional art in japan to educate readers about american ships near japan?

To show how strongly the American president insisted Japan participate in international trade  

Further Explanation:

Sakoku was known to be as Japanese foreign policy which was isolationist and under this period which lasted over 220 years, the trade relations between Japan and other countries were very limited and almost all other foreign nations were banned from entering Japan and not only this, Japanese people were also not allowed from leaving the country. This policy was enacted between 1633 to 1639 and it ended post-1853 when American black ships forced the opening of Japan to American trade. This was preceded by a period that was largely under the unrestricted trade and piracy which was widespread. Japanese merchants travelled to Asia and many times they formed Nihonmachi communities in many cities.  

This period was also known for many foreign traders as well as pirates who were residents of Japan and were very much active in Japanese waters. Japan did not follow the policy of Isolation under the Sakoku policy initially but the system of rules and regulations were applied on commerce and foreign relations that made foreign nations make Japan isolationist.  

Learn More:

1.As the result of a conflict between British troops and a colonial militia in Massachusetts?

link

2.The fourth amendment implies privacy because it protects the right

link

Answer Details:

Grade: High School

Chapter: Isolation policy of Japan

Subject: History

Keywords:

Isolation, Policy, Japan, America, Black Ships, Laws, Trade, Communities, Foreign, Isolationist, Policy, Restrictions.  

in the united states, the president is controlled by the

constitution, and in all respects subordinate to it. insofar

as it deals with presidential power, however, the american

constitution has proved to be a highly malleable document.

with very few exceptions,' the constitutional provisions relating to the president have not been changed at all since

they were ratified in 1787. but in the late twentieth century, those provisions do not mean what they meant in

1787. the constitution is a legal document, and it is enforced judicially; but its meaning was hardly fixed when it

was ratified. in particular, the contemporary president has

far broader powers than the original constitution contemplated. it is remarkable but true that large-scale changes in

the authority of the president have been brought about

without changes in the constitutional text, but nevertheless

without significant illegality.

this is a paradox. is it not clear that constitutional

changes, if not textual, are illegal? the paradox has considerable relevance to our current thinking about the presidency in particular and about constitutionalism in general.

perhaps the framers of the american constitution feared

legislative power most of all; 2 but from well-known events

in the twentieth century, it is possible to conclude that it is

presidential power that holds out the greatest risks to both

liberty and democracy. the president is by far the most visible leader in the nation; he is often the only person in government with a national constituency. moreover, he is