Help!!! I don't understand what I'm supposed to do with the essay question. Can someone explain this in simper terms?

States and communities can respond in various ways to neighboring foreign or external cultures. They can absorb and adapt to new ideas, they can mount vigorous defenses against intrusion or invasion, or they can live quietly alongside those different cultures. Describe three cases from China, two from Japan, and one from Korea of varying responses to external influences. Give specific details and note the time periods in which those responses occurred. Vary the types of responses you cite—some can be the introduction of new religions, or new governmental structures, or new economic innovations (such as agriculture or metallurgy). Some can be military resistance or other types of responses (such as paying bribes) to military threats from outside. Please make sure there is variety; that is, of the six cases you write about, no more than two should deal, for example, with responses to the Mongols or two with responses to the coming of Buddhism, although I expect you to deal with those in at least one case each in your essay. Please also vary the time periods; you should not focus on one single dynasty for all three China cases or one period in Japanese history for both of the Japan cases.

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

john maynrd keynes developed new economic respose to the                           ( b. great depression if the 1930's)

it is in memorial of the independence day