Wait... Why do we have to keep the institution? The root cause of all these problems is capitalism, foo. I was gonna cite some Zizek all over the place, but if you ain't read Zizek, then you have some 'splainin' to do.

I think you may have mistitled this debate, as the description seems to indicate that you think neighbors, pardon my American, are important. Besides, it's not like neighbors are really an option. The population is so large that it's hard to live in most regions without being near other people. If you think about it, our society is built on neighbors, as they are one of the primary means of person-to-person interaction. Now we have the internet, but then that just opens up the availability of cyber-neighbors. Look at the definition of neighbor. From Merriam Webster Online: 1 : one living or located near another

2 : fellow man (i.e., a kindred human being). Geographical neighbors may be on the decline, but things like the intrawebz are allowing people to be more and more in touch. So, in the words of Mr. Rogers, won't you be my neighbor?

Yes with a caveat: It's not so much that the president has too much power, it's that the previous administration took the Nixon philosophy on presidential powers: "When the president does it that means that it is not illegal." Hopeful Obama should usher in a return to normalcy. Winners win, polcap high now, et al.

Alright, I think I see your point know. However, I think the only way in which conservatives would be socialist is that they're soo capitalist they end up effectively swinging back to the other end of the spectrum by making people want to kill them. Which is a silly argument because the proletariat ain't never rose up and not settled for simple tax breaks or what have you.

Furthermore, I'm intrigued by your fascism point, I'm just wondering how it affects the debate. Are you saying that essentially all political ideals can effectively be reduced to the same ideology at their basest level?

By "sarcasm" I mean I'm pointing out that too often on this site we don't allow our opinions to be changed and end up head-butting our opponents. You've enlightened me a bit and I think my views have been changed and bettered. Thank you for that.

Although I still hold that there are alt causes to lack of legalization.

You know what, you're right. I'm sorry, but I can't keep disagreeing with you. It's totally against protocol, but I'm actually going to recognize that the other side might not be made up of a bunch of retarded monkeys (this is sarcasm, not belligerence). You are absolutely right. I still believe that the fact is, the propaganda and the like is the root cause and it must be eliminated for there to be real change, but you're spot on in saying that those that haven't been corrupted need to take a stand. And while I want to believe there are enough smokers out there that can stay sober long enough to make a distance, the fact is there needs to be more. Stoner apathy is not ubiquitous and it's not the sole cause of the lack of legalization, but it's a problem that if solved could perhaps be a catalyst for change.

O, hell naw. this is the argument for me. I'm in love with webcomics. I would DIE for webcomics.

Not really, but still. I've read quite a few, and it's hard to say which is best. First, I'll add a few more to the discussion:

Cyanide and happiness (explosm.net): what QC is to indie culture and xkcd is to nerdiness, C&H;is to violence, AIDS and cancer jokes, and rollicking black humor. Stick figures drawn by four guys regularly lose limbs, have their dreams crushed, or are the subject of bad puns. It's not all that dark, often it's just really random, but the comic is best read if you can recognize there is a certain humor in things like medical malpractice.

Order of the stick (giantitp.com): The premier RPG webcomic, and that's certainly saying something. Specifically, it's based around D&D;. Now, I don't play, but I still love the hell out of this comic. Now, why's that? Because it has a complex plotline, interesting and developed characters, and great art (jk, it's stick figures again, hence the name. But in case you haven't realized, stick figures are capable of being awesometastic). The guy doesn't update frequently enough for my tastes, but there's a huge archive and most of the comics are pretty long (which kinda explains why it takes so long to update, only once a week), so you should probably give this a shot.

I just finished Overcompensating (overcompensating.com) by Jeffrey Rowland, who also does Wigu, which I'm just starting, so I thought I'd give that man a shoutout. OC is a journal comic, but it's the journal of a clearly insane man on a lot of drugs (naw, he just makes most of the junk up). It's inane and silly and awesome. I would recommend all of Jeffrey Rowland's work (check out jjrowland.com) based on what I've seen so far, as well as his status in the industry (he runs topatoco [topatoco.com], the world's largest webcomic merchandise company, which incorporates all QC and xkcd products [indeed, many OC comics feature Jeph Jacques and Randall Munroe, the respective writers of the comics]).

But, on the whole, I'm gonna have to go with Spoonerism. Xkcd was my first and favorite webcomic, and I'm holding true to it. It blends romance, sarcasm, math, and language brilliantly like no other to create the very best on teh intrawebz.

By the way, to whoever made this thread: thank you. It made my day to see I am not alone in my illicit love affair with the lulz.

See: the randomtal's response below me. There's a silly stigma against pot, and a rally filled with a bunch of people that actually smoke it is just gonna get people more up in arms about it in a negative way. The fact is, there aren't enough people that think clearly in this country, and not because too many are drug-addled, but because too many are prejudiced without even getting to the stuff or the people that smoke, have bad morals that are against smoking a plant but for killing in God's name, or are just plain apathetic about change even without smoking.

Rather than just quote the entirety of the Prince for the "ends" side, I shall refute your argument to the best of our ability.

First off, the reason why we are alive is suspect. Indeed, many consider the reason for life the continuation of life. That is an end. Many consider it to be to go to heaven. That is an end. Many consider it to be to have a fun time. That, too, is an end. Indeed, having experiences is in fact an end. The experiences are the means, and having them justifies them.

Ends aren't check boxes any more than means are. An end can be more rewarding than the actual means. Take having a baby. The very first mean might be fun, but then there's the laborious pregnancy, the painful childbirth, the stressful and expensive rearing, et al ad infinitum. However, there is, I've been told, no greater joy than raising a child. Most of the means are a pain. Why, then, do so many people do it? For the end.

We can consider the means while still working towards an end. There is no mutual exclusivity of getting to work and stopping to smell the flowers, you just have to get up a bit earlier.

The end is not based entirely on the means. 2 times 2 is not 22. It is an amalgam of means that creates a different result, 4. Even if we don't consider the means in and of themselves, we can recognize that there were causal agents of the end result that played a role in getting somewhere. If this end is more desirable than the negative effects of the means, it is justified.

Your last point is right: but that's why the end is most important. Without the end we are just living in the moment. That's all well and good, but it's no existence worth living. There can be no love, no accomplishments, no dreams without an end in sight. The steps along the road are a part of this, but they only matter insofar as they are working towards a goal. Sure, we can deeply consider things along the path. But why bother if there is no end to be achieved?

All of your arguments are about why the means are important, but they fail to even contradict why the ends cannot supersede them. If the end is the result of many means, then those means can be recognized as contributing to a larger whole, enriching the worth of the means while effecting the end.

Without the internet, we wouldn't be dabaiting right here. Admittedly, the internet is contributing more to the erosion of our culture than teenage alcoholism or socialized medicine (jk, jk), but that's what makes it so soft and lovable.