THBT: On balance, the competitions in Squid Game (2021) are not an accurate representation of capitalism in South Korea
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 2 votes and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Number of rounds
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
BoP is shared. PRO argues that SG is not an accurate representation of capitalism in SK. CON argues that it is.
Definitions to be used in this debate:
Squid Game - A South Korean survival drama television series created by Hwang Dong-hyuk for Netflix.
Accurate - 1. Free from error, conforming exactly to truth.
Capitalism - A system in which the voluntary exchange of goods and services is legal.
South Korea - An East Asian nation on the southern half of the Korean Peninsula.
1. Pro is allowed to use ChatGPT and cannot be penalized by voters for doing so. (Pro doesn't have to use ChatGPT, but they may not be punished for having it write their arguments, should they choose to do so.)
Con may not use ChatGPT for any purpose.
This is a Practice Debate for my eventual rematch with Savant, so the setup is deliberately made to give me a harder position to argue and defend.
2. Con must waive Round 1.
Accurate- “Deviating only slightly or within acceptable limits from a standard.“
- The games are high-stakes.
- If your opponent dies first, you win.
- No Hold's Barred.
For the purposes of this debate, I will define positive capitalism as laissez-faire capitalismNegative capitalism would be government involvement anywhere from light regulation, to full control of capitalism by the state.
1. The show is build on extreme and radical situations. Most people who take part in SK capitalism never deal with extreme situations.The average Korean seems to earn a comfortable level of wealth.For comparison, state run capitalism nets a much lower level of wealth in China.
3. SK capitalism is based on freedom and opportunities.As I explained above, SK is ranked 15th for economic freedom. The Squid Games show centers on choices made under duress. Most of the contestants are given a choice between the lesser of 2 evils. In laissez-faire capitalism, there would be many more opportunities than the false dichotomy presented within the framework of the show giving contestants only 2 options to either play the game or to continue to suffer their current misfortunes.
1) The show "Squid Game" portrays extreme and radical situations that are not representative of the average experiences within South Korean capitalism. The majority of people in South Korean capitalism do not face life-or-death circumstances. In reality, the average Korean earns a comfortable level of wealth, which contrasts with the extreme situations depicted in the show. Comparatively, state-run capitalism in China yields lower levels of wealth.
2) The show lacks safeguards for breaches of contract, while South Korean law provides remedies for such breaches. In the show, the organizers manipulate and deceive the contestants, leading to breaches of the implied contract and even deaths. However, South Korean law offers various remedies for breaches of contract, and the legal system in South Korea is based on a civil law system that involves a thorough judicial process.
3) South Korean capitalism is characterized by freedom and opportunities, while the show presents choices made under duress. The show limits contestants to a false dichotomy, forcing them to choose between playing the deadly game or continuing their current misfortunes. In reality, South Korean capitalism offers a much wider range of opportunities beyond the narrow choices depicted in the show, as it is ranked 15th for economic freedom. It is much closer to laissez-faire capitalism than it is to crony or Fascist Capitalism as portrayed by Squid Games.
Regarding the relationship between inequality and poverty, my opponent makes a correlation and causation error. The mere fact that income inequality exists in capitalist economies does not automatically equate to widespread poverty. In fact, capitalist societies have proven to be highly effective in lifting millions of people out of poverty and improving living standards. It is the overall level of economic development and the effectiveness of social safety nets and redistributive policies that play a more significant role in addressing poverty. A rising tide lifts all boats, large and small.
Moreover, capitalism provides opportunities for upward economic mobility and innovation, which can contribute to reducing poverty levels. By fostering entrepreneurship and competition, individuals have the potential to improve their economic standing and create wealth. This leads to job creation, improved access to resources, and enhanced standards of living, depending on the supply of energy.