_was the policy designed to give hitler what he wanted as away to avoid war

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

imperialism and colonization in 1936

part of the politics series

basic forms of government

power structure

separation

associated state dominion chiefdom

federalism

federation confederation devolution

integration

empire hegemony unitary state

administrative division

power source

democracy

power of many

direct representative liberal social demarchy others

oligarchy

power of few

anocracy aristocracy plutocracy kakistocracy kraterocracy stratocracy timocracy meritocracy technocracy geniocracy noocracy kritarchy particracy ergatocracy netocracy

autocracy

power of one

despotism dictatorship military dictatorship

others

anarchy theocracy

power ideology

monarchy vs. republic

socio-political ideologies

absolute legalist

constitutional

parliamentary directorial semi-presidential presidential

authoritarian vs. libertarian

socio-economic ideologies

tribalism despotism feudalism colonialism distributism anarchism socialism communism totalitarianism

global vs. local

geo-cultural ideologies

commune city-state national government intergovernmental organisation world government

politics portal

vte

an empire is a sovereign state functioning as an aggregate of nations or people that are ruled over by an emperor or another kind of monarch. the territory and population of an empire is commonly of greater extent than the one of a kingdom.[1]

an empire can be made solely of contiguous territories, such as the austro-hungarian empire or the russian empire, or of territories far remote from the homeland, such as a colonial empire. aside from the more formal usage, the word empire can also refer colloquially to a large-scale business enterprise (e.g. a transnational corporation), a political organisation controlled by a single individual (a political boss), or a group (political bosses).[2] the word empire is associated with such other words as imperialism, colonialism, and globalization. empire is often used to describe a displeasure to overpowering situations.[3]

lol, i think so.

explanation: