Do we really feel that capitalism has afforded the working class a better life than the royalty of the Middle Ages?
This divisive statement was grappled with in the thought-provoking inaugural debate of the Exeter Debating Union, which focused on the provocative motion “This house believes capitalism has failed the working class.”
The discussion featured a wide array of knowledgeable guest speakers with Stella Tsantekidou, a Westminster based political commentator and Dr Guy Standing, a founding member of the Basic Income Earth Network and Professorial Research Associate at SOAS forming the proposition. Turning to the opposition, Jasper Ostle, Head of Research and Education at the Adam Smith Institute and Reem Ibrahim, a Research Fellow at the Reason Foundation led the charge against the statement.
From the offset the opposition appeared to face an arduous task, as displayed by the first Menti poll, revealing that whilst 42 members shared their viewpoint, a decisive 82 agreed with the motion. However despite these early challenges, both Reem and Jasper assured the crowd that they stayed resolute in their task of changing the sceptics’ minds.
They would be offered their first opportunity to do so in the opening statements, whereby each speaker has 7 minutes of uninterrupted time to provide their foundational arguments as to why they are for or against the motion.
The propositions’ speeches centred on how the statement was not asking whether capitalism has worked for the select few, but if it has failed the working class specifically. To prove this, Stella homed in on the illusion promoted by capitalism that if you work hard, your future generations and children will be generously rewarded with better working conditions, education, and wealth. However, the ever-rising prices of housing and the declining education system, in Dr Standing’s view, point to a different reality, one in which the inheritocracy remains whilst the precariat are left in a constant state of instability and uncertainty.
Inheritocracy remains whilst the precariat are left in a constant state of instability and uncertainty
The opposition’s opening statements, however, spoke of a vastly different story. Instead, Jasper looked as far back as the feudal system, describing the unfair and bleak life that a peasant in this age would have suffered. This, in his view, was all changed by the brilliance of capitalism, with him going as far as to proclaim that the working class today has more opportunities and security than the former monarchy of the medieval era.
Unfair and bleak life that a peasant in this age would have suffered. This, in his view, was all changed by the brilliance of capitalism…
This sentiment was echoed by Reem’s assertion that there has “never been a better time” for the working class to be alive, with the current technological and medical innovations taking place only being possible due to the capitalistic ideals of a free market and fewer regulations.
By far the most charged section of the debate was the cross-examination, as shown by the rising differences between the speakers over the required levels of regulations needed in specific industries like AI. Whilst Dr Standing looked to recent controversial decisions from Trump to dismantle regulations in the industry as deeply concerning, Reem instead held a more positive outlook. Contrastingly, she contended that it is the overregulation and the bureaucracy of the government, rather than capitalism, that have failed the working class and even went as far as to advocate for no regulation in these industries if we want human ingenuity to truly flourish.
The closing section of the debate allows the audience to finally have their say, with the Q&A providing students with the opportunity to criticise or seek clarification from the guest speakers on their points. Some of the excellent questions posed that evening included a confirmation from the speakers on the definition of capitalism and the poignant question on if the working class under capitalism are actually free?
After a lengthy and well-fought debate, in the end, there could only be one winner. Here, it was the proposition team that was victorious with a respectable 113 votes in agreement. As such, it seems the question of whether we are better than the kings and queens of old has conclusively been answered in the negative.
Debate Review: ‘This House Believes That Capitalism Has Failed The Working Class’
Do we really feel that capitalism has afforded the working class a better life than the royalty of the Middle Ages?
This divisive statement was grappled with in the thought-provoking inaugural debate of the Exeter Debating Union, which focused on the provocative motion “This house believes capitalism has failed the working class.”
The discussion featured a wide array of knowledgeable guest speakers with Stella Tsantekidou, a Westminster based political commentator and Dr Guy Standing, a founding member of the Basic Income Earth Network and Professorial Research Associate at SOAS forming the proposition. Turning to the opposition, Jasper Ostle, Head of Research and Education at the Adam Smith Institute and Reem Ibrahim, a Research Fellow at the Reason Foundation led the charge against the statement.
From the offset the opposition appeared to face an arduous task, as displayed by the first Menti poll, revealing that whilst 42 members shared their viewpoint, a decisive 82 agreed with the motion. However despite these early challenges, both Reem and Jasper assured the crowd that they stayed resolute in their task of changing the sceptics’ minds.
They would be offered their first opportunity to do so in the opening statements, whereby each speaker has 7 minutes of uninterrupted time to provide their foundational arguments as to why they are for or against the motion.
The propositions’ speeches centred on how the statement was not asking whether capitalism has worked for the select few, but if it has failed the working class specifically. To prove this, Stella homed in on the illusion promoted by capitalism that if you work hard, your future generations and children will be generously rewarded with better working conditions, education, and wealth. However, the ever-rising prices of housing and the declining education system, in Dr Standing’s view, point to a different reality, one in which the inheritocracy remains whilst the precariat are left in a constant state of instability and uncertainty.
The opposition’s opening statements, however, spoke of a vastly different story. Instead, Jasper looked as far back as the feudal system, describing the unfair and bleak life that a peasant in this age would have suffered. This, in his view, was all changed by the brilliance of capitalism, with him going as far as to proclaim that the working class today has more opportunities and security than the former monarchy of the medieval era.
This sentiment was echoed by Reem’s assertion that there has “never been a better time” for the working class to be alive, with the current technological and medical innovations taking place only being possible due to the capitalistic ideals of a free market and fewer regulations.
By far the most charged section of the debate was the cross-examination, as shown by the rising differences between the speakers over the required levels of regulations needed in specific industries like AI. Whilst Dr Standing looked to recent controversial decisions from Trump to dismantle regulations in the industry as deeply concerning, Reem instead held a more positive outlook. Contrastingly, she contended that it is the overregulation and the bureaucracy of the government, rather than capitalism, that have failed the working class and even went as far as to advocate for no regulation in these industries if we want human ingenuity to truly flourish.
The closing section of the debate allows the audience to finally have their say, with the Q&A providing students with the opportunity to criticise or seek clarification from the guest speakers on their points. Some of the excellent questions posed that evening included a confirmation from the speakers on the definition of capitalism and the poignant question on if the working class under capitalism are actually free?
After a lengthy and well-fought debate, in the end, there could only be one winner. Here, it was the proposition team that was victorious with a respectable 113 votes in agreement. As such, it seems the question of whether we are better than the kings and queens of old has conclusively been answered in the negative.
Anna Tolkacheva
Theo James: Actor and Activist
The Strokes: A Live Review
You may also like
Subscribe to our newsletter