Matthew Paris continues to be one of the most sinister voices in British journalism, and his vagueness and failure to draw clear distinctions in my mind only adds to the dangerousness of his rhetoric about the finite value of human life https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/we-can-and-must-put-a-price-on-human-life-p9m3z50jp#

The massive, howling, gap in his argument is his failure to distinguish between passively and indirectly allowing death when making judgements about allocating resources and actively shooting, poisoning or bombing human beings.

The failure to make this distinction is not merely incompetent, I think it is extremely worrying because it is precisely this rhetorical blurting of active and passive that was used to obscure and justify the genocide of American indigenous groups, the Armenians and the Jews.

It’s also incredibly perverse to look at the modern capitalist system and conclude that we quantify human life TOO LITTLE. You have to ask yourself just exactly what rubicon Parris thinks we still need to cross.

A rigorous Nietzschean or Marxist assault on bourgeois Christian morality could be met and challenged, but I fear that the loss of our most basic moral principles will occur amidst bluster, platitude and denial.