ORG: Mobile filters censor innocent content

From BBC News.

Don’t “think of the children” too much, lest you lose valuable freedoms (and IQ points) in the process!

____________

Pornography filters on mobile phones are “censoring” normal web content, according to the Open Rights Group.

Its report found that 60 websites were incorrectly blocked by mobile filters designed to prevent children viewing adult content.

The affected sites included political commentaries, personal blogs and community websites.

The government is considering whether to apply similar blocks to fixed-line broadband services.

Peter Bradwell of the Open Rights Group, author of the report, said the study proved such tools were ineffective.

Burger and chips off the menu: Fast food crackdown as council limits take-aways in poor areas ‘to increase life expectancy’

From the Mail.

Looks like the Healthstapo are invading the London Borough of Haringey…

_______________________

By Tom Goodenough

They have long been linked with an unhealthy lifestyle and causing damage to people’s health.

But now one London council is taking drastic measures to try and stop its residents from indulging in fast food.

Haringey Council is set to become the first in the country to limit the number of pizza, burger and kebab shops on its streets in an attempt to improve the health of its poorest residents.

It is hoped the scheme could even help to increase life expectancy in the area – with research suggesting that those living in a neighbouring area of London with less junk food outlets could live up to nine years longer.

In Tottenham Green where there are 14 fast food takeaways life expectancy is 72.5 years while in Fortis Green there are just three and life expectancy is 81.5.

A draft scheme is in place for the restrictions which would see planning applications for venues considered alongside the need to keep the number of takeaway’s strictly limited.

New outlets could also be banned from within 400 metres of schools, youth clubs, or parks.

Karsten & Beckman Shatter the Democratist Delusion

A  highly recommended read that distills everything that fails about democracy onto less than a hundred pages!

Check out Aschwin De Wolf’s interview with Karsten at Against Politics; and, if you like that, grab yourself a copy.

Democracy is widely considered to be the best political system imaginable. Indeed, it is no exaggeration to say that democracy has become a secular religion. The largest political faith on earth. To criticize the democratic ideal is to risk being regarded an enemy of civilized society.

Yet that is precisely what Karel Beckman and Frank Karsten propose to do. In this provocative and highly readable book, they tackle the last political taboo: the idea that our salvation lies in democracy.

Stateside Self-Defence Teacher Banned from the UK

From the UK Huffington Post.

No surprise  to hear that Theresa May’s behind this ban: it seems a surveillance state “ is conducive to the public good”, yet learning how to fight off predation isn’t.

She’s consistent, if nothing else.

~MRDA~

__________________________________

An American self-defence instructor has been banned from Britain by Home Secretary Theresa May, ahead of a series of seminars the man had planned in the UK.

Tim Larkin, who is accused of promoting vigilante behaviour with his style of teaching, was last night prevented from boarding a flight to Britain from Las Vegas.

He was handed a letter from the UK Border Agency saying he had been excluded from Britain because his presence was not conducive to the public good.

It is thought there was concern over his plans to hold a series of seminars in areas including riot-hit Tottenham and Birmingham.

He has attracted criticism for his approach to self-defence, which teaches victims to attack and injure to fend off assault.

Mr Larkin told BBC Radio 4′s Today programme that his exclusion was a “gross overreaction”.

“It says there’s no right of appeal. I have a lot of support over in the UK, I have people I can go to, there are Members of Parliament I’m sure I can go to, and maybe this can be reconsidered,” he said.

“There is nothing outrageous about it, there’s nothing that I’m going around to incite violence or to incite vigilantism – that’s a characterisation of the people who hear my opinions on self-defence.”

A spokeswoman for the Home Office confirmed that Larkin had been served an exclusion order, adding that “the Home Secretary will seek to exclude an individual if she considers that his or her presence in the UK is not conducive to the public good.”

April Fools Make Useful Tools

 The latest from the Inferno…

Still, hard though it may be to believe, these parliamentary predators actually have fans amongst their potential prey. Ever fearful of the kiddy-fucking Islamist bogeymen beamed into their living rooms, said souls give an eager nod to every piece of liberty-limiting legislation whored out to them through the media, regardless of the cost. Worse, in between slurps on the gonads of government, they see fit to counter dissent with this slavish slice of law-abiding citizenship…

If you’ve got nothing to hide, you’ve got nothing to fear.

…which simply inspires me—depending on my mood—to either laugh, groan, or shake my head.

~MRDA~

No Gods…

Say what you will about Crimethinc, but I’ve always loved this…

The real problem with the idea of universal moral law is that it asserts the existence of something that we have no way to know anything about. Believers in good and evil would have us believe that there are “moral truths”—that is, there are things that are morally true of this world, in the same way that it is true that the sky is blue. They claim that it is true of this world that murder is morally wrong just as it is true that water freezes at thirty two degrees. But we can investigate the freezing temperature of water scientifically: we can measure it and agree together that we have arrived at some kind of objective truth [that is, insofar as it is possible to speak of objective truth, for you postmodernist motherfuckers!]. On the other hand, what do we observe if we want to investigate whether it is true that murder is evil? There is no tablet of moral law on a mountaintop for us to consult, there are no commandments carved into the sky above us; all we have to go on are our own instincts and the words of a bunch of priests and other self-appointed moral experts, many of whom don’t even agree. As for the words of the priests and moralists, if they can’t offer any hard evidence from this world, why should we believe their claims? And regarding our instincts—if we feel that something is right or wrong, that may make it right or wrong for us, but that’s not proof that it is universally good or evil. Thus, the idea that there are universal moral laws is mere superstition: it is a claim that things exist in this world which we can never actually experience or learn anything about. And we would do well not to waste our time wondering about things we can never know anything about. When two people fundamentally disagree over what is right or wrong, there is no way to resolve the debate. There is nothing in this world to which they can refer to see which one is correct—because there really are no universal moral laws, just personal evaluations. So the only important question is where your values come from: do you create them yourself, according to your own desires, or do you accept them from someone else… someone else who has disguised their opinions as “universal truths”?

Haven’t you always been a little suspicious of the idea of universal moral truths, anyway? This world is filled with groups and individuals who want to convert you to their religions, their dogmas, their political agendas, their opinions. Of course they will tell you that one set of values is true for everybody, and of course they will tell you that their values are the correct ones. Once you’re convinced that there is only one standard of right and wrong, they’re only a step away from convincing you that their standard is the right one. How carefully we should approach those who would sell us the idea of “universal moral law,” then! Their claim that morality is a matter of universal law is probably just a sneaky way to get us to accept their values rather than forging our own, which might conflict with theirs.

So, to protect ourselves from the superstitions of the moralists and the trickery of the evangelists, let us be done with the idea of moral law. Let us step forward into a new era, in which we will make values of our own rather than accepting moral laws out of fear and obedience. Let this be our new creed: There is no universal moral code that should dictate human behavior. There is no such thing as good or evil, there is no universal standard of right and wrong. Our values and morals come from us and belong to us, whether we like it or not; so we should claim them proudly for ourselves, as our own creations, rather than seeking some external justification for them.

I’ll take that over the secularized sermonizing of the mainstream Left any day!

~MRDA~

My Position on Immigration

This is a touchy subject among some National Anarchists and Anarcho-Capitalists. The former due to worry of preservation, and the latter due to realizing that we have a welfare state right now and them not wanting to pay the bill.

In my opinion both reasons are fatally flawed. The reason that NA’s are flawed on this issue is simple. Their reason is to want to preserve their identity, yet they neglect the fact that the fucking line is meaningless. Tribes are composed of real people and property, therefore it is reasonable to want to be exclusionary in at least some regards. The line represents not actual people and their tribe, but the corrupt ideology of the Manifest Destiny. It is supporting what the state put into place. The Mexicans are ancestors of those who used to freely travel the land. People bitch about the invasion of Europe, but it is okay for us to take over the land and exclude the original inhabitants? This is not a consistent position. It is largely contradictory.

The solution for the NA’s? Keep them out of where people reside in your tribe. Are you mad that whites are not breeding enough? BREED! Have some kids! Most people I see bitching about the birthrates don’t have more than 2 kids to increase the white population when they die.

I know that I am questioning some of the founding principles of National Anarchism itself, and people will ask why I use the title for myself instead of leaving. Every school of thought has some flaws that need to be addressed. What I have been discussing here should work for those who are racialist and non-racialist. It gives both sides the chance to do what they wish in their tribe. Am I a bit angry? Yes! State borders are the function of the state and this is contradictory to the principles of anarchism. Where people in a particular tribe reside, however, is very real. THAT is not a fiction. Thus, the tribe would be within its right to include or exclude whoever it pleases.

If I have to criticize Troy Southgate to be more consistent, then so be it. With the “protect our borders” rhetoric, we will never get sympathy from those on the left. I thought our point was to unite both left and right to work together on points of agreement. We are not crypto-Fascists, but this stuff makes them suspect it.

Promote the idea of tribes and voluntary association. With these two, everyone gets what they want.

Discussion here.