“This House Believes the Social Contract Is Fraying at the Edges"

Is the invisible agreement that binds citizen and state beginning to unravel?

Join us for a gripping debate where we tackle one of the most pressing questions of our time: Has the social contract—the foundational promise of mutual obligation between the individual and society—begun to falter under modern pressures?

For centuries, the idea of the social contract has underpinned Western political thought, shaping everything from democratic ideals to our expectations of government. But today, rising inequality, distrust in institutions, mass protests, digital surveillance, and democratic backsliding raise urgent questions. Are governments still delivering on their end of the bargain? Are citizens still willing to uphold theirs?

In this intellectual showdown:

• Proponents will argue that the social contract has become threadbare, pointing to a breakdown in trust, widening social divides, and systemic failures in healthcare, education, and justice.

• Opponents will counter that the contract is evolving, not eroding—and that citizens have more tools than ever to shape their societies.

Whether you’re a legal philosopher, political sceptic, or just curious about how society holds together, this is not a debate to miss.

🔍 Come challenge assumptions, reimagine governance, and ask: What do we owe to each other—and is that promise still being kept?

Step into the arena of global discourse with our upcoming debate: "This House Believes the UN's Effectiveness Has Not Lasted the Test of Time."

For over seven decades, the United Nations has been the cornerstone of international diplomacy, peacekeeping, and humanitarian efforts. Yet today, amid evolving global challenges—from protracted conflicts and humanitarian crises to shifting political alliances—critical voices question whether this venerable institution has lost its edge.

Join us as eminent speakers and sharp-witted debaters scrutinise the UN’s legacy. They will examine landmark peacekeeping missions, humanitarian interventions, and diplomatic triumphs, alongside contentious episodes of bureaucratic inertia and political gridlock. Is the UN a bastion of hope in a turbulent world, or merely an anachronistic relic struggling to adapt to modern complexities?

This debate promises a balanced exploration of both sides:

• Proponents of the motion will argue that the UN's diminishing efficacy is evident in its inability to prevent conflicts, enforce international law, and respond decisively to emerging global threats.

• Defenders of the institution will counter that, despite its imperfections, the UN remains an essential platform for multilateral cooperation and global problem-solving.

Whether you are a staunch advocate for reform, a critic of international institutions, or simply curious about the future of global governance, this event will challenge your assumptions and ignite spirited discussion.

Don’t miss your chance to engage with thought-provoking insights and dynamic counterarguments. Prepare to question, learn, and be inspired by a debate that will shape the conversation about our collective future.

In this debate , we will examine whether our education system should take a more proactive role in addressing the impact of digital culture—particularly the potentially harmful influence of certain online personalities—on young minds. This debate invites us to consider several critical questions:

• The Case for Education:
  Proponents argue that in an era dominated by digital communication, it is imperative for schools to equip students with the skills to critically assess online content. By integrating lessons on media literacy and the potential toxicity of some internet influencers, educational institutions can help foster resilience, critical thinking, and responsible digital citizenship. Supporters of this approach point to research that suggests early education in these areas can empower young people to navigate the complex online environment safely.

• Counterarguments and Concerns:
  On the other hand, critics express caution over the role of schools in what some view as a highly specialised area of digital culture. They worry that such educational programmes might inadvertently cast influencers in a uniformly negative light, potentially stifling creativity and entrepreneurial expression. There is also concern about overstepping into areas traditionally managed by families and communities, raising questions about the balance between public education and personal freedom.

Throughout our debate, we encourage participants to consider these perspectives critically and to engage in a dialogue that honours both the potential benefits and the complexities of integrating digital literacy into school curricula. Let us reflect on the broader implications for our society and, in the spirit of historical leaders like Churchill and Kennedy, approach this discussion with determination, open-mindedness, and a commitment to forging a well-informed future.

Thank you for being here, and we look forward to a robust and enlightening debate.