In 16th and 17th centuries the japanese government took all of the following actions in an attempt to protect japanese culture and way of life except: a) prohibit japanese from visiting other countries, even to see familyb) execute japanese citizens who settled in other countries but later decided to return to japanc) heavily regulate foreign economic traded) destroy all remnants of christianitye) prohibit criticism of the feudal shogun system of government

E) Prohibit criticism of the feudal shogun system of government.

Explanation:

Hello!

After the battle of Sekigahara, which occurred on October 21, 1600, Tokugawa Leyasu became the most important political figure in Japan. Leyasu took the title of shogun and founded the Tokugawa clan, giving rise to the third shogunate that ruled Japan.

During this period, the Japanese government produced a reform in the administrative system, known as “bakuhan”. The administrative power was centralized in the city of Edo with the intention of unifying the country.

Success in your homework!

E) Prohibit criticism of the feudal shogun system of government

Explanation:

The Seclusion Edit of 1636, as this document became known, it was strictly a cultural and economical prohibition act. This Edit prohibited contact with European nations, the entry of European ships into Japanese harbors, created rigid economical rules, and laws to punish every Japanese citizen who disobeys these rules. However, no act of the Edit spoke about criticism of the Feudal shogun system, or the punishment if this criticism would happen. The Shogunate was something common and already established as part of the Japanese culture.

the answer to your question is:

strong-mayor system

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