<p>-Communism etc.
-Anthem, Ayn Rand
-Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith
-And other stuff about the benefits of open competition etc.</p>
<p>I had the society topic too…
First I wrote about the Sacco and Vanzetti trial during the Red Scare- basically these two italian guys got convicted unjustly for a crime because they were italian and therefore suspected of being communist- talked about how it was unfair of society to make assumptions based on paranoia. </p>
<p>My second body ppgh was about the crucible but I mostly wrote about the salem witch trials and not a whole lot about the actual book. I wrote about how suspected witches were not given a fair trial because anyone who went against the gov’t was automatically ‘going against God’ which would have undermined the whole puritan belief system at the time, so people were unfairly hung and society would be willing to let people die based on a suspicion. </p>
<p>I got really nervous so I don’t know how coherent my writing actually was though… I threw in a few awkward vocab words so I hope they don’t see right through that lol.</p>
<p>How do you guys think I did?</p>
<p>^^^^^ I think you had great, strong examples. As long as everything was strong, clear, and not redundant you probably did well. If you tried to use a vocab, but didn’t do it correctly you might’ve lost points. You’ll find out soon enough so stay calm because there’s nothing you can do about it now.</p>
<p>I didn’t actually take the June SAT, but I heard about the topic, and here’s what I would have done (by the way, I got a 12 when I did take it, so I’m pretty good at this stuff):</p>
<p>I would’ve done one from history: communism- russia - because everyone was treated the same, the Soviet Union could not work, and eventually the ruler realized it and created glasnost and perestroika, changin the country to more of a democracy, and finally, the ussr fell.</p>
<p>I would’ve done one literature: Brave New World - the peope in the future realized that society could not work out if everyone was the same, and so conditioned people to create classed that are not equal, just so the world could be good.</p>
<p>I would’ve done one from life: I would’ve discussed how, in my job (at Dairy Queen), there needs to be one person in charge, with others under them, or else anarchy would occur. We need someone to delegate jobs to everyone else, or the customers would not get served </p>
<p>-or I could have used a war example - you need a general in charge of everyone, to delegate, or else the enemy would not be defeated (would’ve used my prepared example - the battle of Pengu - without the general xiang zehi (my made up name) in charge of everyone, the enemy would not have been defeated</p>
<p>My essay topic was ‘Should people know the source of the information they encounter?’ I wrote about how qualified mainstream medical advice is ignored in favour of alternative approaches (read about on the internet) and how that can have catastrophic consequences. Then I also wrote about how the source of information determines the veracity of information and gave the examples of Nazi and Anti-Islamic (post 9/11) propaganda. I’m underconfident, because it was rushed and I probably misused a word. I also had a feeble counterpoint about Vietnam War reports and cited Richard Lynn’s study and passed it off as a Nazi scientist’s.</p>
<p>I talked about the Cambodian genocide and how those who were in power were working to make the first real communist country but instead asserted themselves as higher than the people they were attempting to control. I also talked about Death of a Salesman and how changing societal roles are unfair to the aging because the old cannot keep up with and find meaning in lives that do not fit within changing social structutes.</p>
<p>Wait, I thought we all got the same SAT prompt.</p>