Scanthon's Freedom Of Speech

As of June, Scanthon’s refusal to divest from Russian weapons producers has threatened them with devastating economic sanctions which may have led us astray from our American virtue of diplomacy, as Kissinger said: “the art of restraining power.” While the intention of the sanctions may not be to inspire fear, our negotiations can appear to transpire from hostility rather benevolence. Negotiations cannot happen justly if they appear to transpire from power; just negations unfold from a desire for equal and free dialogue—conversation. Free dialogue with Scanthon ought to be the American way to strategize our rhetoric and comprises before force and combativeness, leading to victims, aggressors and a discourse void of discussion, exchange, or …show more content…
Freedom to speak and discuss has been American’s raison d'être from our resistance, emergence, and virtues. By already asserting sanctions and their power, we’ve stepped onto their land with all our combatants behind us, asking for a conversation. By calling this dialogue and not unwarranted aggression, we are lead into an illusion, one where we deny our belligerence and create victims, hiding the entire discourse in our righteousness—we started the discussion. When we find ourselves with a tension between power and dialogue, it makes sense to read the Athenians’ failure at “discussing” with the Melians—Thucydides wrongly calls this dialogue too. But we cannot retreat nor can we take back our threat and negotiates need to happen soon. How can we create a dialogue, an equal and just discussion, when we’ve already threatened Scanthon with destructive sanctions? For a real dialogue and discussion to happen, one where a favorable outcome may emerge, Scanthon cannot become an innocent victim while America uses its aggression. From the Melian dialogue, I recommend evaluating Scanthon argument and language in order to be able to open a true and just