Palmer Events Center
Next: The Revolution!
RECEIVED Sun., July 12, 2009
Dear Austin Chronicle readers,
Louis Black titled my last letter “More of the Same” [“Postmarks” online, June 26]. Ha! About three points stood out to me in his latest “Page Two” column [July 10]. The subject has occurred at least twice recently (democracy is messy and should be/most letter-writers are stupid or vicious). He advanced the same arguments repeatedly in the course of the column, as if repetition strengthened them (more of the same). And he plucked a phrase from my last thread-posting to inhabit his list of “toxic” ideas to inform me that mine are permanently counted among them (“crimes against society”). Ironically, unless Black supports the futile war on drugs, he agrees with my contention (there can be no crime against a concept, ergo, drug laws are unconstitutional); yet it is still met with derision. His list of said toxic themes contained only a few categories populated with numerous synonyms and repetitions, yet he finished it with “into infinity.” I learned in school that a democratic government assumes people are corrupt (hence our checks and balances), and a communist government assumes they are good (that everyone will eagerly contribute to the benefit of the whole). I have realized that there is a difference between knowledge and intelligence and creativity. No amount of education – gained formally (via money) or on one’s own (via curiosity) – or experience makes a stupid person smart, a talentless person creative – or provides a sociopath with a conscience. Of all the demarcations of society (sex, race, class, intelligence), none indicates a member’s moral condition: whether their actions are mostly good, mostly evil, or evenly divided. I have also learned that no amount of anecdotal evidence or logic will affect Black’s opinions, which are literally calcified. But I know he enjoys the joust. Next: the revolution.
Louis Black titled my last letter “More of the Same” [“Postmarks” online, June 26]. Ha! About three points stood out to me in his latest “Page Two” column [July 10]. The subject has occurred at least twice recently (democracy is messy and should be/most letter-writers are stupid or vicious). He advanced the same arguments repeatedly in the course of the column, as if repetition strengthened them (more of the same). And he plucked a phrase from my last thread-posting to inhabit his list of “toxic” ideas to inform me that mine are permanently counted among them (“crimes against society”). Ironically, unless Black supports the futile war on drugs, he agrees with my contention (there can be no crime against a concept, ergo, drug laws are unconstitutional); yet it is still met with derision. His list of said toxic themes contained only a few categories populated with numerous synonyms and repetitions, yet he finished it with “into infinity.” I learned in school that a democratic government assumes people are corrupt (hence our checks and balances), and a communist government assumes they are good (that everyone will eagerly contribute to the benefit of the whole). I have realized that there is a difference between knowledge and intelligence and creativity. No amount of education – gained formally (via money) or on one’s own (via curiosity) – or experience makes a stupid person smart, a talentless person creative – or provides a sociopath with a conscience. Of all the demarcations of society (sex, race, class, intelligence), none indicates a member’s moral condition: whether their actions are mostly good, mostly evil, or evenly divided. I have also learned that no amount of anecdotal evidence or logic will affect Black’s opinions, which are literally calcified. But I know he enjoys the joust. Next: the revolution.
Perplexed, yet faithfully yours,
Kenney C. Kennedy
Kenney C. Kennedy
[Louis Black responds: Sometimes the headlines I use for individual "Postmarks" are snarky and dismissive. I do try to stay away from those, but sometimes I forget basic civility, which is a mistake. Often in "Page Two," I think that my writing indicates I'm talking about "some" or "a few" rather than "most" or "all." On occasion I haven't made that distinction clear enough for even our most casual readers. For these transgressions I genuinely apologize.]