Smoking Weed With the President of Uruguay

“We don’t go along with the idea that marijuana is benign, poetic and surrounded by virtues. No addiction is good,” he said. “We aren’t going to promote smokefests, bohemianism, all this stuff they try to pass off as innocuous when it isn’t. They’ll label us old reactionaries. But this isn’t a policy that seeks to expand marijuana consumption. What it aims to do is keep it all within reason, and not allow it to become an illness.” President Jose Mujica

At the end of 2013, Uruguay became the first country in the world to fully legalize marijuana. VICE correspondent Krishna Andavolu headed over to Uruguay to check out how the country is adjusting to a legally regulated marijuana market.

Along the way, he meets up with Uruguay’s president, José Mujica, to burn one down and talk about the president’s goal of a chicken in every pot, a car in every garage, and six cannabis plants per household.

Watch more episodes of Weediquette here: http://www.vice.com/weediquette-show

President Jose Mujica on the responsibility of citizens to exercise their rights to civil disobedience to create the forms of liberty that help hold a people together: [translated from stupid Google Translate]
But as we are in the framework of this globalizing era where the world shrinks, it intercom increasingly civilization increasingly dependent on internet, since almost 15 years spread, drums beating, theories. Theories that arose with the loincloth to establish non-violent forms of struggle against dictatorship. And this is beautiful looks like beautiful things. These theories have spread to popularize the civil resistance, long worked to popularize and planned strategies to achieve motorization within the villages, using contemporary methods, particularly network communication. The methods of nonviolent resistance, but of active resistance, ultimately paralyze seeking not only to governments, under the lure, or sleep – because it could have been a source of fighting dictatorships the road less bloody and from that point of view, seem reasonably intelligent and morally defensible these theories. But naturally overflow to all societies. Because in a democratic society, it is inevitable that there are contradictions, there are minorities who are affected, they differ, because democracy is required to respect the who disagree, not democracy is needed to agree. Democracy is the guarantee most important differences that may exist in a society. But in a society decisions must be made, and our representative democracy have virtue or defect -Whatever you want-to make decisions on behalf of the majority who supported it and that gives legitimacy.