Writing Tips Metaphors and Similes - Get Writing Tips with Proofed!

Writing Tips Metaphors and Similes - Get Writing Tips with Proofed! Writing Tips: Metaphors and Similes Metaphors and similes are common in creative writing, and both use comparisons to tell us something about the world. However, there are some important distinctions between the two. So, before you dive into the seas of literature, let us offer the life jacket of knowledge as we explain the differences between metaphors and similes. We will apologize in advance for all the nautical imagery, but we do enjoy a theme. What Are Metaphors? Metaphors are words or phrases applied in a non-literal way to make a comparison. For example: The winter sea was a dark blue wasteland stretching to the horizon. Here, the metaphor is calling the sea a â€Å"dark blue wasteland.† The sea is not literally a wasteland; if it were, it would be considerably drier. However, by making this comparison, we can suggest that the winter sea shares qualities with a wasteland (e.g., being inhospitable and empty). The essence of a metaphor is that, even though it is not literal, it is stated as if it were. It is not just a comparison: We are saying that the sea is a wasteland, which looks like a literal statement on the surface, so we have to know that it is a metaphor before we can understand it. Metaphors are common in poetry and literature, but they’re also in some everyday phrases. If we say we are â€Å"all at sea,† for instance, we mean that we’re confused, not literally that we are lost on the ocean! Even the term â€Å"table leg† is technically a metaphor, since â€Å"leg† originally applied to limbs only, but it so common now we don’t even notice it. It is therefore known as a dead metaphor. What Are Similes? While metaphors involve suggesting that something is something else, similes are more modest. If we use a simile, we are only saying that something is like something else. For example: The sky rumbled like an argument in the heavens. Here, we’re not suggesting that there was actually an argument going on; we are simply saying that the thunder reminds us of an argument. Similes therefore use terms such as â€Å"like† or â€Å"as if† to indicate they are not literal (e.g., â€Å"the wind seemed angry† or â€Å"we ate as if we were starving†). Metaphors vs. Similes Ultimately, you don’t need to know the differences between metaphors and similes to use them. However, knowing this is essential if you’re writing about literature for a college paper! Remember: A metaphor involves claiming that something is something else to make a comparison A simile only involves claiming that something is like something else

Emperor Montezuma Before the Spanish Arrived

Emperor Montezuma Before the Spanish Arrived Emperor Montezuma Xocoyotzà ­n (other spellings include Motecuzoma and Moctezuma) is remembered by history as the indecisive leader of the Mexica Empire who let Hernan Cortes and his conquistadors into the magnificent city of Tenochtitlan virtually unopposed. Although it is true that Montezuma was unsure of how to deal with the Spaniards and that his indecision led in no small measure to the downfall of the Aztec Empire, this is only part of the story. Before the arrival of the Spanish conquistadors, Montezuma was a renowned war leader, skilled diplomat and an able leader of his people who oversaw the consolidation of the Mexica Empire. A Prince of the Mexica Montezuma was born in 1467, a prince of the royal family of the Mexica Empire. Not one hundred years before Montezumas birth, the Mexica had been an outsider tribe in the Valley of Mexico, vassals of the mighty Tepanecs. During the reign of Mexica leader Itzcotl, however, the Triple Alliance of Tenochtitlan, Texcoco and Tacuba was formed and together they overthrew the Tepanecs. Successive emperors had expanded the empire, and by 1467 the Mexica were the unquestioned leaders of the Valley of Mexico and beyond. Montezuma was born for greatness: he was named after his grandfather Moctezuma Ilhuicamina, one of the greatest Tlatoanis or Emperors of the Mexica. Montezumas Father Axaycatl and his uncles Tà ­zoc and Ahuà ­tzotl had also been tlatoque (emperors). His name Montezuma meant he who makes himself angry, and Xocoyotzà ­n meant the younger to distinguish him from his grandfather. The Mexica Empire in 1502 In 1502, Montezumas uncle Ahuitzotl, who had served as emperor since 1486, died. He left an organized, massive Empire which stretched from the Atlantic to the Pacific and covered most of present-day Central Mexico. Ahuitzotl had roughly doubled the area controlled by the Aztecs, launching conquests to the north, northeast, west and south. The conquered tribes were made vassals of the mighty Mexica and forced to send quantities of food, goods, slaves and sacrifices to Tenochtitlan. Succession of Montezuma as Tlatoani The ruler of the Mexica was called the Tlatoani, which means speaker or he who commands. When it came time to select a new ruler, the Mexica did not automatically select the previous rulers eldest son like they did in Europe. When the old Tlatoani died, a council of elders of the royal family came together to select the next one. The candidates could include all male, high-born relatives of the previous Tlatoani, but since the elders were looking for a younger man with proven battlefield and diplomatic experience, in reality they were choosing from a limited pool of several candidates. As a young prince of the royal family, Montezuma had been trained for warfare, politics, religion and diplomacy from an early age. When his uncle died in 1502, Montezuma was thirty-five years old and had distinguished himself as a warrior, general and diplomat. He had also served as a high priest. He was active in the various conquests undertaken by his uncle Ahuitzotl. Montezuma was a strong candidate, but was by no means his uncles undlisputed successor. He was elected by the elders, however, and became Tlatoani in 1502. Coronation of Montezuma A Mexica coronation was a drawn-out, splendid affair. Montezuma first went into a spiritual retreat for a few days, fasting and praying. Once that was done, there was music, dancing, festivals, feasts and the arrival of visiting nobility from allied and vassal cities. On the day of the coronation, the lords of Tacuba and Tezcoco, the most important allies of the Mexica, crowned Montezuma, because only a reigning sovereign could crown another. Once he had been crowned, Montezuma had to be confirmed. The first major step was to carry out a military campaign for the purposes of acquiring sacrificial victims for the ceremonies. Montezuma chose to war against Nopallan and Icpatepec, vassals of the Mexica who were currently in rebellion. These were in the present-day Mexican State of Oaxaca. The campaigns went smoothly; many captives were brought back to Tenochtitlan and the two rebellious city-states began paying tribute to the Aztecs.   With the sacrifices ready, it was time to confirm Montezuma as tlatoani. Great lords came from all over the Empire once again, and at a great dance led by the rulers of Tezcoco and Tacuba, Montezuma appeared in a wreath of incense smoke. Now it was official: Montezuma was the ninth tlatoani of the mighty Mexica Empire. After this appearance, Montezuma formally handed out offices to his highest ranking officials. Finally, the captives taken in battle were sacrificed. As tlatoani, he was the maximum political, military and religious figure in the land: like a king, general and pope all rolled into one. Montezuma Tlatoani The new Tlatoani had a completely different style from his predecessor, his uncle Ahuitzotl. Montezuma was an elitist: he abolished the title of quauhpilli, which meant Eagle Lord and was awarded to soldiers of common birth who had shown great courage and aptitude in battle and warfare. Instead, he filled all military and civil positions with members of the noble class. He removed or killed many of Ahutzotls top officials. The policy of reserving important posts for the nobility strengthened the Mexica hold on allied states, however. The royal court at Tenochtitlan was home to many princes of allies, who were there as hostages against the good behavior of their city-states, but they were also educated and had many opportunities in the Aztec army. Montezuma allowed them to rise in military ranks, binding them - and their families - to the tlatoani. As tlatoani, Montezuma lived a luxurious life. He had one main wife named Teotlalco, a princess from Tula of Toltec descent, and several other wives, most of them princesses of important families of allied or subjugated city-states. He also had countless concubines and he had many children by these different women. He lived in his own palace in Tenochtitlan, where he ate off of plates reserved for only him, waited on by a legion of servant boys. He changed clothes frequently and never wore the same tunic twice. He enjoyed music and there were many musicians and their instruments at his palace. War and Conquest Under Montezuma During Montezuma Xocoyotzà ­ns reign, the Mexica were in a near-constant state of war. Like his predecessors, Montezuma was charged with preserving the lands he inherited and expanding the empire. Because he inherited a large empire, much of which had been added by his predecessor Ahuitzotl, Montezuma primarily concerned himself with maintaining the empire and defeating those isolated holdout states within the Aztec sphere of influence. In addition, Montezumas armies fought frequent Flower Wars against other city states: the main purpose of these wars was not subjugation and conquest, but rather a chance for both sides to take prisoners for sacrifice in a limited military engagement.   Montezuma enjoyed mostly successes in his wars of conquest. Much of the fiercest fighting took place to the south and east of Tenochtitlan, where the various city-states of the Huaxyacac resisted Aztec rule. Montezuma was eventually victorious in bringing the region to heel. Once the troublesome peoples of the Huaxyacac tribes had been subjugated, Montezuma turned his attention to the north, where warlike Chichimec tribes still ruled, defeating the cities of Mollanco and Tlachinolticpac. Meanwhile, the stubborn region of Tlaxcala remained defiant. It was a region made up of some 200 smallish city-states led by the Tlaxcalan people united in their hatred of the Aztecs, and none of Montezumas predecessors had been able to defeat it. Montezuma tried several times to defeat the Tlaxcalans, launching large campaigns in 1503 and again in 1515. Each attempt to subjugate the fierce Tlaxcalans ended in defeat for the Mexica. This failure to neutralize their traditional enemies would come back to haunt Montezuma: in 1519, Hernan Cortes and the Spanish conquistadors befriended the Tlaxcalans, who proved to be invaluable allies against the Mexica, their most hated foe. Montezuma in 1519 In 1519, when Hernan Cortes and the Spanish conquistadors invaded, Montezuma was at the height of his power. He ruled an empire which stretched from the Atlantic to the Pacific and could summon more than a million warriors. Although he was firm and decisive in dealing with his empire, he was weak when faced with the unknown invaders, which in part led to his downfall. Resources and Further Reading Berdan, Frances: Moctezuma II: la Expansion del Imperio Mexica. Arqueologà ­a Mexicana XVII - 98 (July-August 2009) 47-53.Hassig, Ross. Aztec Warfare: Imperial Expansion and Political Control. Norman and London: University of Oklahoma Press, 1988.Levy, Buddy. . New York: Bantam, 2008.Matos Moctezuma, Eduardo. Moctezuma II: la Gloria del Imperio. Arqueologà ­a Mexicana XVII - 98 (July-August 2009) 54-60.Smith, Michael. The Aztecs. 1988. Chichester: Wiley, Blackwell. Third Edition, 2012.Thomas, Hugh. . New York: Touchstone, 1993.Townsend, Richard F. The Aztecs. 1992, London: Thames and Hudson. Third Edition, 2009Vela, Enrique. Moctezuma Xocoyotzin, El que se muestra enojado, el joven. Arqueologia Mexicana Ed. Especial 40 (Oct 2011), 66-73.

Commentary on quotations Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

Commentary on quotations - Essay Example Unfortunately, greed and ambition got the better of the European colonizers treating Indians, along with other â€Å"inferior† races as indentured servants. The process of colonization was necessary to give the ideas freedom, prosperity, and identity a potent reality in America as a civilization of peoples evolved. Immigration of new settlers coming from various parts of the world and migration to the west enabled cultural interactions which resulted to the conscious awareness of cultural differences. As history begins to unfold, the definition between savagery and civilization has become clear. As people of different backgrounds emerged, their motives which were easily characterized by their actions, defines what the word civilize truly means. "Twenty years ago, half our continent was an unknown land, and the Rocky Mountains were our pillars of Hercules. Five years hence, the Orient will be our next door neighbor. We shall hold the worlds granary, the worlds treasury, the worlds highway. But we shall have no West, no border, no Civilization, in line of battle, pressing back hostile savages, and conquering hostile nature.† (p.10) Richard White wrote about the frontier in American culture based on Frederick Jackson Turners academic paper entitled The Significance of the Frontier in American History. The quote is a reminiscence of the past and the prediction of what was to come in the future, seeing the how things have been going at present and for the last quarter of a century, the end of the frontier is very imminent. Immigrants have suppressed the pioneers, referred to as savages, so that the land could be theirs. As a civilization of peoples evolved, a strong, rich, and progressive America was born. Yet, being civilized ended on a superficial level because overcoming of mans hostile nature proved to be a never ending struggle. A speech by Captain Pipe, Hopocan, in 1781, a

What causes wars Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1750 words

What causes wars - Essay Example Second reason for failure to bargain is that resources that parties can take over through a war have higher benefits than the benefits that may be obtained from reaching an agreement (Schultz, 2001, p.55). Thirdly, there may be a difference between the benefits that the leaders foresee and the benefits that the population foresees. Fourthly, information about the advantages and disadvantages of having a war are unclear to both the parties and, lastly, agreement cannot be practiced because other parties involved are against all agreements. A war may end up lasting longer if both the sides fail to reach an agreement or if the sides keep realizing that the cost of war is lower than its benefit. While on the other hand, if a war starts as there is little or unclear information of the strength of the parties, and as the war continues and information becomes clearer, the possibility of reaching an agreement becomes higher and the chances of the war ending soon even increases. Reasons that lead to failure to bargain between two parties are considered as rational reasons for war, but in general there are various irrational causes of war (Levy, 2010, p.67). These causes have certain amount of rationality as these causes are related to bargaining failures. Religion has been a cause of war for several years, two countries or states having different religious believes fight against each other on the basis of war (Salter, 1932, p.21). In this cause of war, it is thought that there is no material involvement, while the idea behind this cause of war may be to eradicate the existence of the population of one religion or increasing the population of one of the religious party at war. In this cause of war, parties fail to reach an agreement as they believe that they are being directed to fight this war by a higher authority. Leaders in this kind of war fail to reach an agreement as

Diminishing American Pride Essay Example for Free

Diminishing American Pride Essay The book Zeitoun basically talks about a Syrian American family’s experience in the time of Hurricane Katrina. It was mainly divided into two story lines, one of Abdulrahman Zeitoun, the main character, a Syrian American contractor; and one of Kathy, his wife, a white woman converted Muslim. Zeitoun had an extraordinary life, also an extraordinary experience in the time of Hurricane Katrina. He was a successful well-known businessman in local area. When everyone else was fleeing their hometown before Katrina came, Zeitoun chose to stay to protect his house and business. Later then when the city was flooded, he travelled around with his small canoe, delivering help and resources. However, he was wrong arrested as a looting suspect then and was sent into jail. He was treated as a terrorist and taken away the right of fair trial, forced to confine in a maximum security prison for a crime he didn’t commit. At the end, Zeitoun was released and able to unite with his family again, but he was not compensated in any ways for his misfortune. As this book describes, everything in the time of Hurricane Katrina had gone crazy, including the American criminal justice system. The main objection of this book is to criticize racism phenomenon in America and the rotten criminal justice system. Racism is a main subject in this book. It was first mentioned in this book in Kathy’s story line about her past life experience. â€Å"Years earlier, Kathy and her mother had gone to the DMV together to have Kathy’s license renewed. Kathy was wearing her hijab, and had already received a healthy number of suspicious looks from DMV customers and staff by the time she sat down to have her picture taken. The employee behind the camera did not disguise her contempt. ‘Take that thing off,’ the woman said. † (Zeitoun page 58) From the mentioning of these kinds of past experience seemed irrelevant to Hurricane Katrina, we can see the author’s desire to insert the topic of racism into this book. Kathy’s case shrinks small comparing to Zeitoun’s case in his arrest. â€Å"‘You guys are al Qaeda,’ the soldier said. Todd laughed derisively, but Zeitoun was startled. He could not have heard right. Zeitoun had long feared this day would come. Each of the few times he had been pulled over for a traffic violation, he knew the possibility existed that he would be harassed, misunderstood, suspected of shadowy dealing that might bloom in the imagination of any given police officer. After 9/11, he and Kathy knew that many imaginations had run amok, that the introduction of the idea of ‘sleeper cells’- groups of would-be terrorists living in the U. S. and waiting, for years or decades, to strike- meant that everyone at their mosque, or the entire mosque itself, might be waiting for instructions from their presumed leaders in the hills of Afghanistan or Pakistan. (Zeitoun page 212) It didn’t surprise me at all that Zeitoun have those thoughts that might seem over-worried in some people’s eyes.. Indeed, another author Maysan Haydar had mentioned similar thoughts in her essay â€Å"Veiled Intentions: Don’t Judge a Muslim Girl by Her Covering. † â€Å"Now some people hold their breath a bit longer, assuming I’m a fundamentalist or wondering if I’m there to cause them harm. I sense people studying me on the trains, reading the cover of the book in my hand and trying to gauge if I am one of ‘us’ or one of ‘them’. I grapple with the frustration that I can’t reassure everyone individually that my goals have everything to do with social justice and nothing to do with holy war. But I have seen suspicious fade in the eyes of the pregnant woman to whom I’ve given my subway seat or the Hasidic man whose elbow I’ve taken to help him up the stairs. † (Haydar pg 406) I feel very sorry for Haydar and Zeitoun’s experiences. Muslim people are always feared to be presumed as terrorist. American frightened by the traumatic event of 9-11 developed a stereotype against people from Middle East. The fear of being attack also again drove American crazy on national security. However, for whatever reason, racism has put upon so much harm on people we discriminate against. Muslim people like Zeitoun, hard working and honest people, are forced to live under the fear of being prosecuted for his race someday, taken away from his family, locked up in somewhere nobody would know he’s died or not. Those fears have made them coward under a lowly skin, live like second-class citizens. â€Å"In the weeks after the attacks on the Twin Towers, Kathy saw very few Muslim women in public. She was certain they were hiding, leaving home only when necessary. In Late September, she was in Walgreens when she finally saw a woman in a hijab. She ran to her. ‘Salaam alaikum! ’ she said, taking the woman’s hands. The woman, a doctor studying at Tulane, had been feeling the same way, like an exile in her own country, and they laughed at how delirious they were to see each other. † (Zeitoun page 46) Indeed, as part of international society, American allowed people to be exiled from their own country. In Edward Said’s essay, â€Å"States†, he escribed how they, Palestinian people was exiled from their own country and forced to scatter around the world, be denied of personal identity everywhere. †Some Israeli settlers on the West Bank say: ‘The Palestinians can stay here, with no rights, as resident aliens. ’ Other Israelis are less kind. † (Said pg 546) â€Å"The fact is that today I can neither return to the places of my youth, nor voyage freely in the countries and places that mean the most to me, nor feel safe from arrest or violence even in the countries I used to frequent but whose governments and policies have changed radically in recent times. (Said pg 547) In a documentary I have watched, in some cases, if a Palestinian wants to travel from points to points, they have to go through checkpoints set up by local military. They would be asked to show their prove of identity and relevant documents which sources were mostly denied. Nobody tell them what to do then, no laws protect them, some of them can’t even go to hospitals and schools like every other human being in the course that they don’t have a legal identity. We as adults, teach our kids not to bully in school, that it’s wrong to do so. In contrast, as a human, we allow our country, ourselves to bully on people with a different skin tone. Isn’t this hilarious? Another main subject posted in this book is the criminal justice system in America. Zeitoun was initially arrested in his house, then taken to the bus station, naked searched and put in jail. Throughout the whole process, he had never been told of his charges, no phone calls granted, no one had ever given him a chance to defend himself or to find a lawyer. He was treated as terrorist. In the course of his Middle-Eastern accent, everything about him seemed suspicious to the guards. He was kept in inhumane confinement, was given pork for food despite his religion. He had a deep wound in his feet but was never treated nor given any medical attention. There were basically no laws in effect, Zeitoun was treated as if he wasn’t an American citizen anymore, constitutions and laws don’t protect him. â€Å"Watching the evidence on the table mount, Zeitoun’s shoulders slackened. Most municipal systems were not functioning. There were no lawyers in the station, no judges. They would not talk their way out of this. The police and soldiers in the room were too worked up, and the evidence was too intriguing. (Zeitoun 215) But the most disappointing fact about this is what t I found out later in the book, that all of this happened to Zeitoun was not special cases happened once or twice, it was somehow permitted. â€Å"But knowing that Zeitoun’s ordeal was caused instead by systemic ignorance and malfunction- and perhaps long-festering paranoia on the part of the National Guard and whatever other agencies were involved-was unsettling. It said, quite clearly, that this wasn’t a case of a bad apple or two in the barrel. The barrel itself was rotten. (Zeitoun 307) This is totally different from what I learnt from my administration of justice class. The whole process is wrong. How could an innocent person be justified this way? Not even a phone call allowed. It is nothing better than abduction. Who gave government the right to treat people like this? I guess under the name of National Security, there’s nothing government can’t do, all laws and constitutions could be undermined. James Bamford, author of essay â€Å"Wired† pointed out the same point, says in his essay, â€Å"’They violated the Constitution setting it up. He says bluntly. â€Å"But they d idn’t care. They were going to do it anyway, and they were going to crucify anyone who stood in the way. ’† â€Å"Basically all rules were thrown out the window, and they would use any excuse to justify a waiver to spy on Americans. † (Wired pg 0843,, 084) National Security, initially served the principle of protecting Americans has become a tool to against Americans. â€Å"The NSA has turned its surveillance apparatus on the US and its citizens. It has established listening posts throughout the nation to collect and sift through billions of email messages and phone calls, whether they originate within the country or overseas. It has created a supercomputer of almost unimaginable speed to look for patterns and unscramble codes. Finally, the agency has begun building a place to store all the trillions of words and thoughts and whispers captured in its electronic net. † (Wired pg 81) Isn’t it scary to know our government has already gone this far for â€Å"National Security†? Anyone is a target of NSA. But who is more prone to be checked on? I believe this could be linked again to the topic of racism. Look back to Zeitoun and his fellows’ arrest; I believe they would never have been presumed as terrorists, despite the same context and evidence, if all four of them are white. The book Zeitoun serves more than a journalism. Dave Egger cleverly brought out these two important topics to us through the book. Could we still call our country States of freedom and equality after learning all these previously unknown facts? It’s time for people to stand up to protect the prides of America, fix our criminal justice system, drive racism into history and look forward to a better, true States of freedom and equality.

Mirror for Man - People are the way that they are Raised :: Mirror for Man Essays

  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Kluckhohn explained the differences and similarities among the world's peoples by taking different life examples of different cultured people and compared them to another person who was raised up in a different lifestyle. At first, he brought up several questions, asking why certain people do or don't do certain things. These questions were served as guides, which led on to the examples. They also served as attraction to the readers who are curious about different people from another culture. Then he went on to compare people from different cultures in his examples. He compared an American woman, who restricts her husband to only one mate, with a Koryak woman, who shares her husband with another woman; an American raised in China with the Americans raised here in the United States; and lastly, he compared people's reactions from eating the meat of chicken or tuna fish to that of a rattlesnake. Kluckhohn has a strong point in viewing human's culture. I agree with his definition of culture -- "the part of the environment that is the creation of human beings." People react to things differently because they were raised up in different environments with different cultures. No matter who the person is, or where he (or she) was born, his behavior and his personality traits developments would depend on the environment that he is living in. The way people think, feel, react, and behave also are depended upon life experiences. They feel different emotions because they have felt this emotional happiness or sadness before. They think what is right and what is wrong because they have learned from past experiences. They react to different things because they experienced things that please them and the things that displease them. They behave in certain ways because they want to design their way of living into what they have admired from other people's lives. I was born in Hong Kong, the school systems and the people living there are very strict in comparing with the United States. Over in Hong Kong, students go to school for seven hours and then they would go home and spend another seven or eight hours on homework. The school system really forces you to study and do your homework to stay up with the rest of the class. But yet, the students would accept the homework assignments without complaining because they are use to doing so much homework and taking the pressure.

Hypocrisy in Democracy Essay

Freedom of Speech Silence What is democracy? Democracy is a form of government where the people rule, not a dictator, a king or aristocrats. Democracy means that people have a say in law and state. This is impossible to do without a voice. How are people supposed to run the government if they aren’t allowed to speak their mind? This is hypocrisy. That is like telling someone they can travel where ever they want as long as it is in this little box. Our voice is the most important tool and weapon that we have possession of. Without our voice, we are nothing. American is â€Å"the land of the free and the home of the brave† or at least it is supposed to be. Certain people, like college presidents and other leaders are trying to take away the freedom that Americans have. If they succeed in taking away our rights and freedoms, America will no longer be a democracy. America will turn into a dictatorship. This is unacceptable. It is written in the constitution that Americans h ave freedom of speech. Freedom of expression and speech is the First Amendment, the first. It is the first because it is the most important. Without freedom of speech; people are unable to learn and grow, unable to find themselves and stand out, and unable to stand up for what they believe in. If universities get rid of freedom of speech, people will be incapable of learning and developing into the person they should be. Mistakes teach people more than anything else could. Mistakes might not be made if freedom of speech is taken away; if they are made others would be unable to tell them for fear they might embarrass them. Even worse than that, people would be unable to learn and discuss about history for fear of hurting other people. Keith John Sampson was said to be guilty for public racial harassment for reading a history book. This book was about the KKK and how the Irish defeated them. It was a complete anti-Klan book and a history book, but the university didn’t care. Sampson was just trying to expand his knowledge, but he was to be punished. They claimed that he was guilty of reading a book that has a lot of bad feelings behind it in public. However, it is a history book. It is something people learn about in school. The only way to prevent the past from happening again is to learn about it, no matter how bad it is. If the universities take away the right to learn and discuss about the past, we are doomed to repeat it. Besides learning about mistakes, freedom of speech also allows people to discover themselves. College is the first time that people are able to do what they want. They decided what times they want to go to school and what classes they want to take. College is when people find themselves. They find out what they want to do, what the love and who they are. One of the ways people do this is by expression, which falls under the freedom of speech. How can people grow if they are confined in a small box? They can’t grow; they can’t become the people they are supposed to be. College is about exploring, making mistakes, and discovering their life path. College is supposed to be freeing. One of the biggest reason people go to college, besides getting a degree for a better futu re, is to discover themselves. If universities ban self expression people will stop going to college. People will start dropping out and unemployment will sky rocket. The main reason people go to college on campus is for all the experience. If people will still get a college education, they will take online courses and there will be no need for campuses or presidents or staff. They will all lose their jobs. However, the most important thing that will be lost without freedom of speech is the right to stand up for what we believe in. Without freedom of speech, people will not be able to stand up for they believe in. without peoples powerful voices, the world wouldn’t be where it is today. This is why the First Amendment was made, to make sure that people would always be able to speak out and stand up. Unfortunately, people are trying to take that right away. Hayden Barnes, a former Valdosta student, was almost expelled for standing up for what he believes in. The University was planning to spend forty million dollars to build a parking garage. Barnes didn’t like this. He believed that all the money would be better off going to something different. He started protesting the building of the garage. The president of the University was extremely mad. He was the one who wanted to make the garage and he didn’t want someone to stop him. He started going out of his way to get Barnes expelled from school. He looked into Barnes’s background and even looked into his social networks to see what he put on there. Barnes was almost kicked out of school for what he stood up for. No one should ever be afraid to say what they believe and what they stand for. People have the desire to be in control and take rights away from people. Thankfully we have rights and regulations that don’t let them take away what is ours. The First Amendment was made to make sure that everyone in America has the right to express themselves through words and actions. Also, thankfully, there are people who fight for our rights when people try to take them away. FIRE is there to help anyone who needs it. When there are people trying to take away rights, it is wonderful to know that someone will be there to help.