Violent men, armchair men
Sir: It would seem that Mr George Gale has missed his true vocation. He should have been a philosopher—of the village inn variety.
In 'Violent men and armchair men' (18 July) we were presented with the same glib, naive answers to weighty and imponderable questions that typify his articles. There are violent men, and there are non-violent men, and that is that. Everybody can be fitted into a nice, easy compartment, and who cares about the intricacies of human nature? Life must be very simple for Mr Gale.
However, although the article was not, in itself, instructive, it was revealing as regards the nature of its author. It is manifest that Mr Gale deplores Christians (vide 'A land of troubles', 11 July), and now the left, not
because of their alleged violence—the ostensible object of his abomination, but because both Christians and, to a lesser ex- tent, the left do possess principles with which they try to govern their 'lives. This is rather more than can be said of Mr Gale, whose sole desire seems to be the denigration of the principles of others—the invariable practice of the mediocrity. If one were as wont to categorise as Mr Gale, one would call it a plain case of jealousy.
David Mills Daniel
The Rectory, Bangor-on-Dee. Wrexham
Previous page
