The UK government's announcement that every phone will soon blast an "emergency alarm" to test its preparedness for war, as reported by The Daily Sceptic on June 28, 2025, lays bare a glaring contradiction in the modern paternal state. While urging citizens to brace for a "direct threat" in a "wartime scenario," the state simultaneously enforces stringent bans on weapons like machetes and swords, as seen in recent Australian laws and similar UK restrictions. This paradox, disarming a population while warning of conflict, creates a passive, vulnerable society ill-equipped to respond to existential threats, undermining both individual agency and collective resilience.
The UK's Emergency Alert System, set for its second test since 2023, will send a piercing siren and message to all phones, warning of potential life-threatening dangers, from wildfires to war. The government's explicit reference to a "wartime scenario," amid escalating Middle East tensions, signals a perceived risk of conflict involving nuclear powers. This follows reports of heightened U.S. security measures, such as barricades around the White House, and arrests of Iranian nationals, including an alleged sniper, suggesting fears of asymmetrical threats like terrorism. The alert system, designed to inform without requiring phone numbers, underscores the state's technological reach into citizens' lives, a hallmark of paternal governance that prioritises control over communication.
While sounding war alarms, the UK, like Australia, enforces strict weapon bans to curb violence. In the UK, carrying knives with blades over three inches can lead to seven years in prison under the Offensive Weapons Act 2019, and recent proposals target "zombie knives" and machetes with even harsher penalties. Australia's machete bans in Victoria and South Australia, discussed at the blog today, impose fines up to $47,000 or $20,000, respectively, with exemptions for farmers described as bureaucratic and rare. These laws aim to reduce street crime, but strip citizens of tools historically used for self-defence, farming or survival.
This disarmament creates a paradox: a state preparing for war expects a disarmed populace to respond to existential threats. Classical liberalism, rooted in thinkers like John Locke, emphasises the individual's right to self-preservation, including the means to defend oneself. By banning weapons, the state assumes sole responsibility for protection, fostering dependency. Yet, as eugyppius notes in the context of Germany's migration-related disorder, paternal states often fail to manage even routine public safety, let alone wartime threats. X users echo this, with one stating, "They take our knives, tell us to prepare for war, but can't even stop street fights. What are we supposed to do, throw phones at invaders?" This reflects a broader frustration: a disarmed society is left passive, reliant on a state that may not deliver in crisis.
A disarmed populace, conditioned by paternal policies, risks collapse in a wartime scenario. History shows that resilient societies rely on active, capable citizens. During World War II, Britain's Home Guard, armed with personal and improvised weapons, bolstered national defence. Today, a population stripped of such tools and discouraged from self-reliance, through both weapon bans and speech laws like Germany's Section 140, lacks the agency to respond to threats. The UK's alert system, while informative, offers no actionable guidance beyond "follow instructions," reinforcing passivity.
Some X users warn of societal fragility, noting, "We're told to prepare but can't own a knife or speak freely. Good luck surviving when the state collapses." This aligns with eugyppius's observation that states control dissent over addressing disorder, as seen in Germany's speech crime prosecutions. A population fined for emojis or silenced on migration issues is unlikely to muster the resolve or skills needed for wartime resilience.
Classical liberalism champions individual liberty, including the right to self-defence and free expression, as essential for a robust society. Locke argued that individuals retain the right to protect their lives when the state cannot, a principle echoed by Mill's insistence on liberty to foster initiative. The UK's weapon bans and speech restrictions, mirrored in Germany's Strafbefehle and Australia's machete laws, violate these ideals by disempowering citizens and prioritising state control. The war alert system, while framed as protective, reinforces this paternalism by dictating response without enabling action.
The paradox is stark: a state warning of war undermines the very autonomy needed to survive it. As The Daily Sceptic notes, the government's focus on alarms amid Middle East tensions suggests external threats, yet domestic policies leave citizens defenceless. X users argue, "They want us scared and compliant, not armed and ready." This echoes eugyppius's anarcho-tyranny, where the state tolerates chaos but polices minor dissent, eroding the social contract that liberalism depends on.
The paternal state's contradictions extend beyond security. The Daily Sceptic reports an impending economic collapse. Policies like mandatory calorie cuts in supermarkets, decried as "nanny statism," further erode personal responsibility, mirroring weapon bans. A society stripped of agency, economically strained, and disarmed is ill-prepared for war's demands, as seen in historical collapses of overly centralised states like the late Roman Empire.
The UK's war alarm test exposes the paternal state's fatal flaw: it demands preparedness while fostering passivity. By banning weapons and stifling speech, the state undermines the liberal principles of self-reliance and free discourse needed for societal strength. This leaves citizens vulnerable, unable to act when the state falters.
To avoid collapse, the UK and the West, must restore individual agency, reconsidering draconian bans and speech laws, to build a population capable of facing threats. Until then, the siren's wail is less a warning than a reminder of a disempowered society, left to tremble at the state's command.
"Every phone in the UK will blast out an 'emergency alarm' on the orders of the Government as the system is tested for the second time in two years and the Government warns Britain to prepare for war. The Mail has the story.
All UK devices will blast out an alarm tone later this year in a new test of the 'Emergency Alert System'.
First launched in 2023, this system is designed to warn the public if there is a danger to life nearby.
This latest test comes as the Government's security strategy warns that the UK homeland could come under "direct threat" in a "wartime scenario".
The renewed testing of the emergency system also comes at a time when escalating conflict in the Middle East has sparked concerns of a wider war between nuclear powers.
When it was first tested, the emergency system sent a message to phones which read: "Severe Alert. This is a test of Emergency Alerts, a new UK government service that will warn you if there's a life-threatening emergency nearby.
"In a real emergency, follow the instructions in the alert to keep yourself and others safe.
"Visit gov.uk/alerts for more information. This is a test. You do not need to take any action."
The Emergency Alert System was designed to quickly inform the public of an impending threat.
According to the Government, this could include severe flooding, wildfires, or extreme weather events.
Once the alert is sent, all phones in the affected area will make a loud siren-like sound, vibrate, and read out the warning.
The sound and vibration will trigger even if your phone is set to silent.
The Government does not need to know your phone number in order to send the message, and all phones will automatically trigger the alert.
The next nationwide test of the Emergency Alert System will occur at some point in the coming year.
However, the exact date is yet to be announced.
After this year's test, the Emergency Alert System will continue to be tested once every two years."