Tony Hsieh bankrolled his followers, who enabled his risky lifestyle(wsj.com)
wsj.com
Tony Hsieh bankrolled his followers, who enabled his risky lifestyle
https://www.wsj.com/articles/tony-hsieh-zappos-death-entourage-11616761915
85 comments
I was a founder of a VTF (downtown project VC) funded company. We had an exit. I can’t vouch for the rest of the companies but hard drinking wasn’t part of our culture. Careful painting all of us with that brush. I was around for the first Vegas Jelly, and was funded in 2012 so I would be part of the “surge” you defined.
Hey I'm from Vegas as well and I have a friend getting his MFA working on a story on the Downtown Project and it seems like he's coming to a lot of the conclusions you've come to. If it's possible I'd love to get you in touch with him to talk about your experience a bit.
One simple and obvious lesson to point out here is that you better make peace with yourself before coming into possession of any large sum.
Money can destroy you just as easily as it can empower you. Look at what happens to a significant percentage of lottery winners.
It's an amplifier, and it can amplify your problems and self-destructive tendencies along with your desire to do good.
Money can destroy you just as easily as it can empower you. Look at what happens to a significant percentage of lottery winners.
It's an amplifier, and it can amplify your problems and self-destructive tendencies along with your desire to do good.
I've seen quite a few people go out like this. Back in the late 1990's I founded a head shop that later gave birth to multiple locations and had family members and friends getting rich. Lost two family members (dead), can't speak to another one (my father), I ended up arrested as a consequence of my brother's withdrawal symptoms, a business partner went off the deep end smoking crack and meth while leading an entourage of prostitutes and flipping a vehicle or two while ditching his family of twenty years, and my father was doing nearly the same shit while secreting hookers at his elderly mother's house. He ended up in jail on serious drug charges.
This isn't even about half the shit that went down.
So yeah, success and money can really trash lives if people aren't ready or they have underlying issues, but a lot of times you don't see it coming.
Before that we ran a fairly uneventful chain of video rental stores and otherwise led a bog normal and happy middle class life.
This isn't even about half the shit that went down.
So yeah, success and money can really trash lives if people aren't ready or they have underlying issues, but a lot of times you don't see it coming.
Before that we ran a fairly uneventful chain of video rental stores and otherwise led a bog normal and happy middle class life.
What is a head shop?
"A head shop is a retail outlet specializing in paraphernalia used for consumption of cannabis and tobacco and items related to cannabis culture and related countercultures."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_shop
Money can buy so many things that people crave, and in itself has always been a subject of craving.
When toxic or habit-forming materials are involved a craving can be observed which is the type very difficult to control.
But an excess or virtually unlimited supply of a craveable requires an unusual degree of control otherwise it often does not end well and more than just the excess is lost.
Cravers will be drawn like a magnet.
Toxic materials which affect decision-making and are accepted as eccentric within popular culture can give rise to some of the most volatile situations.
When toxic or habit-forming materials are involved a craving can be observed which is the type very difficult to control.
But an excess or virtually unlimited supply of a craveable requires an unusual degree of control otherwise it often does not end well and more than just the excess is lost.
Cravers will be drawn like a magnet.
Toxic materials which affect decision-making and are accepted as eccentric within popular culture can give rise to some of the most volatile situations.
Young athletes seems to be another really big case of this. Lots of people with short careers but huge earnings who either cannot handle the money or hand their finances over to people who try to take advantage of them.
Within minutes of his death breaking the news, someone in the comment posted on HN about this enablement. I had skepticism but it also felt way too specific and out of nowhere for me to think they were lying. It was heartbreaking to eventually realize it was indeed the truth.
It's what I call the Michael Jackson Effect.
Someone surrounds themselves with people who are financially dependent on them, so they only tell them that they're great, and whatever they do is the best thing that has ever happened. The unchecked praise-money feedback loop eventually leads to the host's destruction.
See also: Silicon Valley.
Someone surrounds themselves with people who are financially dependent on them, so they only tell them that they're great, and whatever they do is the best thing that has ever happened. The unchecked praise-money feedback loop eventually leads to the host's destruction.
See also: Silicon Valley.
I appreciate the more nuanced view of the way his entourage both enabled and tried to help him. Earlier coverage (that I saw) just focused on the fact that all his friends were on his payroll and were forbidden from trying to get him to rehab or an intervention. But it sounds like many were trying to help in ways they could come up with that Tony would tolerate - hiring the doctor, for example. And it sounds like his family had started considering a conservatorship, as well.
I'm glad to have the impression that he wasn't surrounded only by sycophants - it sounds like he was a fundamentally good person trying to do good in the world, and it's a more positive thought that many of his friends were trying to meet him where he was and get him back on track, rather than only enabling his downward spiral - though certainly it sounds like there was plenty of that, too.
I'm glad to have the impression that he wasn't surrounded only by sycophants - it sounds like he was a fundamentally good person trying to do good in the world, and it's a more positive thought that many of his friends were trying to meet him where he was and get him back on track, rather than only enabling his downward spiral - though certainly it sounds like there was plenty of that, too.
A teacher of mine once told us that "The road to hell is paved with good intentions." I think that's one of the paradoxes of life and we see this over and over again where a lot of good people try to do the right thing but the collective effects of their efforts end up being net negative. Rather than conspiracies, I think this paradox can explain some of the challenges we face today. Barbara Tuchman wrote a great book called "The March of Folly" that basically documents some famous cases of people unwittingly working against their own best interest, even if the individual steps themselves might have made sense.
"Among the many friends the entrepreneur made over his life, some said the cause of his death had spanned many months, in plain sight to those who surrounded him. Last summer, his Park City companions hired an on-call doctor. Unless Mr. Hsieh moderated his drug and alcohol use, the doctor said, he would die within six months."
It's one thing to overly indulge a billionaire friend, it's another to endanger his physical/mental well being to the point of death.
It's one thing to overly indulge a billionaire friend, it's another to endanger his physical/mental well being to the point of death.
You cannot forcibly make someone go to rehab. People are quick to blame his 'friends', but it appears that they hired a personal doctor, who gave doctorly advice. What more could they do?
I kinda agree. It's entirely possible that they were being callous and greedy, but from what I've read, it sounds like they made every effort short of getting fired. Now, maybe they should have all worked together and risked him declaring them all disloyal, but it's not like they didn't try.
Plus, if I had a close friend who was doing mushrooms and nitrous oxide, I wouldn't necessarily think that was particularly dangerous. I, perhaps ignorantly, would have considered those to be relatively safe things to experiment with.
It's so easy to say what should have been done after the fact, but it can be incredibly difficult to know the right thing in the moment.
Plus, if I had a close friend who was doing mushrooms and nitrous oxide, I wouldn't necessarily think that was particularly dangerous. I, perhaps ignorantly, would have considered those to be relatively safe things to experiment with.
It's so easy to say what should have been done after the fact, but it can be incredibly difficult to know the right thing in the moment.
+1, anyone that was telling him the truth gets removed, so what are they supposed to do? Looks like they tried with the wellness center and doctor. It's more grey than black and white.
In geriatric medicine, there is a somewhat defined, albeit difficult, process of declaring someone medically incompetent to manage their own affairs; they usually are committed to specialized (memory care) facilities. In some cases, the symptoms and rationale are clearly obvious. In others...these patients can be vulnerable to less scrupulous individuals.
For a wealthy high functioning billionaire, but one who is arguably affected by dopamine dysregulation that compromises his faculties, I'd imagine it's a trickier path to walk...
For a wealthy high functioning billionaire, but one who is arguably affected by dopamine dysregulation that compromises his faculties, I'd imagine it's a trickier path to walk...
The press have already painted his friends as opportunistic hangers-on. Imagine how it would have looked if they actually started making moves to take on power of attorney.
yeah...that's what seems to make it especially tricky. There would have to be a good lawyer involved, and I'm not sure how they would find a trusted third party to be the conservator...
I've often wondered about this, in the abstract.
What if the reason someone isn't motivated to get better is precisely because of the acute drug dependency? In other words, what if getting someone through the initial withdrawal of, say, heroin stabilized them enough to feel motivated to improve their lives?
After all, we use this reasoning to prescribe medication for e.g. anxiety and depression. The reasoning is that drugs are sometimes very good at providing people with just enough stability to allow for long-term solutions like therapy.
If this is indeed the case, might there not be some situations in which forcibly taking someone to rehab would be helpful?
The "you cannot forcibly make someone go to rehab" seems like policy more than actual truth. It may even be a good policy, for all I know. But assuming I'm right, maybe we shouldn't confuse the two.
What if the reason someone isn't motivated to get better is precisely because of the acute drug dependency? In other words, what if getting someone through the initial withdrawal of, say, heroin stabilized them enough to feel motivated to improve their lives?
After all, we use this reasoning to prescribe medication for e.g. anxiety and depression. The reasoning is that drugs are sometimes very good at providing people with just enough stability to allow for long-term solutions like therapy.
If this is indeed the case, might there not be some situations in which forcibly taking someone to rehab would be helpful?
The "you cannot forcibly make someone go to rehab" seems like policy more than actual truth. It may even be a good policy, for all I know. But assuming I'm right, maybe we shouldn't confuse the two.
Our lives and bodies are our own, to use, build, and destroy as we see fit.
It's one thing to help a friend avoid an accidental death, but this speaks to a months long pattern of behavior that was clearly a deliberate personal decision.
What's the point of wealth if not obtaining the basic freedom to live (and die) how we choose?
It's one thing to help a friend avoid an accidental death, but this speaks to a months long pattern of behavior that was clearly a deliberate personal decision.
What's the point of wealth if not obtaining the basic freedom to live (and die) how we choose?
>a months long pattern of behavior that was clearly a deliberate personal decision
Drug/Alcohol addiction is hardly a personal decision... This is a dangerous point of view to take.
Drug/Alcohol addiction is hardly a personal decision... This is a dangerous point of view to take.
Whose decision is it, if not the person who opts to become addicted and continue that addiction?
People like to personify addiction, as if there is some outside force controlling the person, but this is to discount and discard every single addict who decided to clean themselves up. I know lots of addicts who chose to continue, and I know lots of addicts who chose to stop.
Don't personify the addiction: the brain of an addict is still that person's brain, and their decisions are still their own, even if they are de-legitimized in your own opinion due to their addiction. There is literally no one else who could possibly be responsible for the decisions of that human's brain and actions than that human being.
What goes in to our own bodies when we are not coerced by another person is our own decision, full stop.
People like to personify addiction, as if there is some outside force controlling the person, but this is to discount and discard every single addict who decided to clean themselves up. I know lots of addicts who chose to continue, and I know lots of addicts who chose to stop.
Don't personify the addiction: the brain of an addict is still that person's brain, and their decisions are still their own, even if they are de-legitimized in your own opinion due to their addiction. There is literally no one else who could possibly be responsible for the decisions of that human's brain and actions than that human being.
What goes in to our own bodies when we are not coerced by another person is our own decision, full stop.
"Opting" to become addicted?
I know one person who says of herself that some days she just can't go into the city. Because she knows on those days she'd get hooked again if she were to pass a place where she used to shoot. And she talks about "it", that urge, in the third person.
I fully "discount" her judgment in some areas and she would agree. Like I can't reason you into holding your breath for longer than a minute, I can't reason her into ignoring the urge. I would not treat as "legitimate" a decision she takes following that urge. Whether she stays clean or not depends a lot on her surroundings. Does that put responsibility on her friends? You bet.
I wonder, what do you make of Toxoplasmosis? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxoplasmosis#Rodents
I know one person who says of herself that some days she just can't go into the city. Because she knows on those days she'd get hooked again if she were to pass a place where she used to shoot. And she talks about "it", that urge, in the third person.
I fully "discount" her judgment in some areas and she would agree. Like I can't reason you into holding your breath for longer than a minute, I can't reason her into ignoring the urge. I would not treat as "legitimate" a decision she takes following that urge. Whether she stays clean or not depends a lot on her surroundings. Does that put responsibility on her friends? You bet.
I wonder, what do you make of Toxoplasmosis? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toxoplasmosis#Rodents
> I know one person who says of herself that some days she just can't go into the city. Because she knows on those days she'd get hooked again if she were to pass a place where she used to shoot.
If one can opt out (by eg not going into the city), one can also opt in.
If one can opt out (by eg not going into the city), one can also opt in.
Looks like you wanted to build an argument but lost steam after one sentence. Here, let me continue for you: "So if she chooses to go to the city, it will be her decision and consequently her responsibility when she inevitably gets hooked again."
Oh but you see, it's her friends that give her the freedom not to go to the city: If they weren't there, she wouldn't have that choice.
Oh but you see, it's her friends that give her the freedom not to go to the city: If they weren't there, she wouldn't have that choice.
>opts to become addicted
?????
>I know lots of addicts who chose to continue, and I know lots of addicts who chose to stop.
I highly doubt you know any addicts full stop.
>Don't personify the addiction: the brain of an addict is still that person's brain, and their decisions are still their own
I just can't even, are you a scientologist or something? I have literally never encountered arguments like yours. Truly outlandish.
"Addiction exerts a long and powerful influence on the brain that manifests in three distinct ways: craving for the object of addiction, loss of control over its use, and continuing involvement with it despite adverse consequences. While overcoming addiction is possible, the process is often long, slow, and complicated."
"...we recognize addiction as a chronic disease that changes both brain structure and function."
https://www.health.harvard.edu/%E2%80%A6/how-addiction-hijac...
?????
>I know lots of addicts who chose to continue, and I know lots of addicts who chose to stop.
I highly doubt you know any addicts full stop.
>Don't personify the addiction: the brain of an addict is still that person's brain, and their decisions are still their own
I just can't even, are you a scientologist or something? I have literally never encountered arguments like yours. Truly outlandish.
"Addiction exerts a long and powerful influence on the brain that manifests in three distinct ways: craving for the object of addiction, loss of control over its use, and continuing involvement with it despite adverse consequences. While overcoming addiction is possible, the process is often long, slow, and complicated."
"...we recognize addiction as a chronic disease that changes both brain structure and function."
https://www.health.harvard.edu/%E2%80%A6/how-addiction-hijac...
I saw no mention of addictive drug use. Whippits and mushrooms isn't going to throw you off the deep end. Something else was going on. Pills/meth/crack/coke? Those can lock you into addiction and rewrite your brain and you will not be in control.
> Whippets ... aren't going to throw you off the deep end
That may be true in your experience, but not mine: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25327689
That may be true in your experience, but not mine: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25327689
Ok, take that back. I have seen people go a bit crazy on NOS but at Hsieh's level I can see how this would have been over the deep end for sure.
one can be addicted to drugs, even ones without severe physical dependency
Ultimately everyone makes his own decisions, especially someone with essentially unlimited funds. We can go through the moves and end at the same conclusion.
I didn't know about this.
I can't open the link, but I read https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/26/technology/tony-hsieh-dea... and the whole thing seems classic untreated bipolar disorder.
I wonder how much of SV shenanigans can be attributed to manic breakdowns. There was already a "hypomanic advantage" meme going around a while ago; and, of course, thinking you can slightly toe the line towards a controled flirt with mania is classical bipolar anosognosia.
PSA: For many years, I self-administered the Young's Mania Ratings Scale everytime I felt the scales begin to tip. It's very short and impressively insightful. You might not know what mania is actually is, and if you live a high-intensity lifestyle you owe it to yourself to take it just once:
https://psychology-tools.com/test/young-mania-rating-scale
I can't open the link, but I read https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/26/technology/tony-hsieh-dea... and the whole thing seems classic untreated bipolar disorder.
I wonder how much of SV shenanigans can be attributed to manic breakdowns. There was already a "hypomanic advantage" meme going around a while ago; and, of course, thinking you can slightly toe the line towards a controled flirt with mania is classical bipolar anosognosia.
PSA: For many years, I self-administered the Young's Mania Ratings Scale everytime I felt the scales begin to tip. It's very short and impressively insightful. You might not know what mania is actually is, and if you live a high-intensity lifestyle you owe it to yourself to take it just once:
https://psychology-tools.com/test/young-mania-rating-scale
I've been in tech in the Bay Area for 15 years, mostly in startups, and I can say that untreated mental health issues (myself included for many years) are a very real thing.
I wonder if this will be the new frontier of bio-hacking: attempting to replicate the symptoms of mania to get a "performance advantage".
This is one reason some people use some kinds of drugs (particularly uppers of various sorts). They create a temporary manic or hypomanic state, even if that's not the term the users would choose to describe the produced state. Of course, it doesn't always lead to positive or even neutral outcomes especially as many are habit forming and the user can develop a tolerance to it (necessitating more of the drug in order to achieve a comparable effect as before, which exacerbates issues stemming from the side effects and high-dose/long-term use).
Look at college students and knowledge workers using various ADD/ADHD medications, as an example.
Look at college students and knowledge workers using various ADD/ADHD medications, as an example.
Is mania a desired state though? It's very chaotic and we already have adderall. I would guess it was more of a facsimile of happiness than a productivity hack. I'm partying all day, my mood is chemically elevated so surely this is what happiness is right?
That's why it's called 'bio-hacking'. Implicit in the name is the assumption that you can have the benefits of something without the natural drawbacks.
> and, of course, thinking you can slightly toe the line towards a controled flirt with mania is classical bipolar anosognosia.
This is one of those amazingly insightful things sort of hiding in plain sight. There is some plain wisdom right here.
This is one of those amazingly insightful things sort of hiding in plain sight. There is some plain wisdom right here.
[deleted]
“In a sort of ghastly simplicity we remove the organ and demand the function. We make men without chests and expect of them virtue and enterprise. We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. We castrate and bid the geldings be fruitful.”
C.S. Lewis, Abolition of Man.
It's the epitome of unreasonable expectations: a self-fulfilling prophecy by setup. "Yes men" are terrible, especially if they're there to mooch rather than question or be more than good weather "friends."
It's the epitome of unreasonable expectations: a self-fulfilling prophecy by setup. "Yes men" are terrible, especially if they're there to mooch rather than question or be more than good weather "friends."
The excerpts from Jewel's letter to Tony are heartbreaking. It seems that she saw where he was headed, the situation he had put himself in, and what was likely to happen as a result.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/angelauyeung/2020/12/04/tony-hs...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/angelauyeung/2020/12/04/tony-hs...
> Ms. Baleson helped spearhead plans for a wellness center at the Ranch, hoping to pull Mr. Hsieh out of his spiral. The plans were canceled in September after a disagreement in the group over who should get a commission for the project.
Sheesh... this really sums it up. Tragic.
Sheesh... this really sums it up. Tragic.
The sticky notes of meaningless delusions/motivational words younger grade schoolers may be urged to think and write about how they feel of them seem oddly reminiscent of pictures surrounding Kanye West in recent years. For quite some time, and still, I believe he's going to end up at the center of the next cult shootout we see in the US.
I was lucky to have met Tony twice, having a decent discussion one time. What happened is really unfortunate, and I feel as if we're going to see very similar situations unfold with many of those who are new money making a fortune from tech. I imagine it's got to be unfathomably hard to stay grounded and find meaning after acquiring so much money. All the syncophants in the world will come after you, and as it's been seen with Musk, many others will attempt to bet against any future endeavors of yours just to make a quick buck.
I was lucky to have met Tony twice, having a decent discussion one time. What happened is really unfortunate, and I feel as if we're going to see very similar situations unfold with many of those who are new money making a fortune from tech. I imagine it's got to be unfathomably hard to stay grounded and find meaning after acquiring so much money. All the syncophants in the world will come after you, and as it's been seen with Musk, many others will attempt to bet against any future endeavors of yours just to make a quick buck.
Anyone else get a sense that something similar is happening with Elon Musk? Guy seems to be unraveling
Yeah, obvious for some time now. His wife looks ematiated and his kid is named with hieroglyphic symbols or some shit. This on top of the weird tweets and eccentric displays. He reminds me of a high functioning addict. Met quite a few business owner addicts in my time.
Reminder: Nitrous can be highly addictive: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25327689
With all due respect (and not saying these groups have overlap) there is a notable presence of people on Hacker News that minimize the danger of or encourage drug experimentation, if not regular drug use.
Tony Hsieh is ultimately responsible for his choices that led to his tragic and early death. But it leaves a bad taste to see people calling out his entourage here and then other people advocating similar behavior in other submissions.
Tony Hsieh is ultimately responsible for his choices that led to his tragic and early death. But it leaves a bad taste to see people calling out his entourage here and then other people advocating similar behavior in other submissions.
> With all due respect (and not saying these groups have overlap) there is a notable presence of people on Hacker News that minimize the danger of or encourage drug experimentation, if not regular drug use.
I think a better way of describing it is a continuum of belief around drugs. Most people aren't talking about caffeine or alcohol when they say "drug use" but those are indeed psychoactive drugs as well.
"All drugs are wrong, but some are useful." is perhaps a useful model for thinking about it? (Not that I think drugs are wrong, just that nothing, and I mean nothing, in life is without cost in a cost/benefit analysis.)
All substances we ingest, from distilled water, to table salt, to a cup of coffee, broccoli, a beer, a cheeseburger, morphine, or methamphetamine have various effects, long term and short, on our bodies, and we should understand those effects as best we can before we ingest any of them.
I've seen ketamine save people's lives, and I've seen it destroy people's lives. Same with firearms. Sharp tools are a good thing, on balance, in my opinion, but should be wielded with knowledge and understanding in order to be safe.
I think a better way of describing it is a continuum of belief around drugs. Most people aren't talking about caffeine or alcohol when they say "drug use" but those are indeed psychoactive drugs as well.
"All drugs are wrong, but some are useful." is perhaps a useful model for thinking about it? (Not that I think drugs are wrong, just that nothing, and I mean nothing, in life is without cost in a cost/benefit analysis.)
All substances we ingest, from distilled water, to table salt, to a cup of coffee, broccoli, a beer, a cheeseburger, morphine, or methamphetamine have various effects, long term and short, on our bodies, and we should understand those effects as best we can before we ingest any of them.
I've seen ketamine save people's lives, and I've seen it destroy people's lives. Same with firearms. Sharp tools are a good thing, on balance, in my opinion, but should be wielded with knowledge and understanding in order to be safe.
> All substances we ingest, from distilled water, to table salt, to a cup of coffee, broccoli, a beer, a cheeseburger, morphine, or methamphetamine have various effects, long term and short, on our bodies, and we should understand those effects as best we can before we ingest any of them.
Don't forget sugar:
https://www.webmd.com/diabetes/features/how-sugar-affects-yo...
Don't forget sugar:
https://www.webmd.com/diabetes/features/how-sugar-affects-yo...
Are there really posts advocating similar behavior to this story? I think I've missed those.
This is a tragedy and I sympathize with everyone involved. Also, a lesson to not surround yourself with sycophants and drugs. It's easy to blame the sycophants, but Mr. Hsieh would have replaced anyone who tried to help. Imagine you're around and care about him. Is it better to stick around and try to help, as they attempted with the wellness center and doctor, or just leave him to the wolves?
[deleted]
When a random addict dies everyone knows whose fault it is. But when a rich addict dies, everyone wants to know whose fault it is. Sure.
That's unnecessarily cynical. Tony Hsieh was not just some random rich guy, particularly not to this community.
Whip-its? This guy had $840M and his drug of choice was whip-its? That is strangely amusing...
Whip-its have become pretty popular among the burning man crowd. I remember seeing piles in East Palo Alto parking lots and wondering if they were from bored kids or bored techies.
maybe the implication is that it is surprising he would be cracking whipped cream chargers vs. using his billionaire concierge connections to get a tank(crooked dentist, whatever).
Would look classier than 10000 little chargers in piles -- nitrous addicts can consume a staggering quantity of little pods, basically back to back constantly every 15 seconds for hours. It is reportedly very 'moreish', as the brits would say.
Would look classier than 10000 little chargers in piles -- nitrous addicts can consume a staggering quantity of little pods, basically back to back constantly every 15 seconds for hours. It is reportedly very 'moreish', as the brits would say.
Previous articles about his death mentioned that he also had portable nitrous tanks that he'd use on walks outdoors in Park City and in other situations where he couldn't go through individual whip-its. His being tethered to the tank was one of the things that motivated Jewel to write the letter.
They are very expensive and have pretty heavy effects. Not sustainable. I couldn't really do that many because of the impact. Hard to imagine what his knock on effects were. Well...
US-centric views of love have evolved more towards ‘if it feels right, do it’
It feels odd to tell anyone ‘no’ because people think you are judging them, so most just stay quiet.
In a different culture, Tony may have survived if people felt comfortable questioning dangerous behavior.
It feels odd to tell anyone ‘no’ because people think you are judging them, so most just stay quiet.
In a different culture, Tony may have survived if people felt comfortable questioning dangerous behavior.
It's not contributing much to the discussion to just say "This." but man I really just want to say, indeed as someone who isn't originally from an American culture but now resides in America: the observation you make is profound and so important, and I hope everyone considers this and thinks about this.
Because I know exactly what you're talking about and I'm struggling with this so much, about being supportive of our friends on various decisions they make sometimes even when we don't think deep down it's the right thing in some situations, but we're afraid to say it for an increasing amount of reasons: criticism from woke culture, being afraid of being seen as bossy, party-pooper, disagreeable, puritan. But friends are friends, give them honesty, show them the doubt you feel, tell them your gut feeling. Yeah it'll take some work to make it palatable, but do it, give the hard take that you really should.
Because I know exactly what you're talking about and I'm struggling with this so much, about being supportive of our friends on various decisions they make sometimes even when we don't think deep down it's the right thing in some situations, but we're afraid to say it for an increasing amount of reasons: criticism from woke culture, being afraid of being seen as bossy, party-pooper, disagreeable, puritan. But friends are friends, give them honesty, show them the doubt you feel, tell them your gut feeling. Yeah it'll take some work to make it palatable, but do it, give the hard take that you really should.
I don't think this is true. In the circles I run in (which are as nearly as "woke" as you can be), your family and closest friends have carte blanche to tell you you're full of shit.
I know I rely on my family and friends to do so. Conversely, I know I'm able to do so with them and they love me just the same.
I mean, it's a trope at this point in American media where your loved one can slap your face hard to give you a reality check. I've never personally had that happen but to say the culture is a culture of enablers doesn't seem well supported.
I know I rely on my family and friends to do so. Conversely, I know I'm able to do so with them and they love me just the same.
I mean, it's a trope at this point in American media where your loved one can slap your face hard to give you a reality check. I've never personally had that happen but to say the culture is a culture of enablers doesn't seem well supported.
There’s a Russian saying, “Your friends are the ones who can tell you ‘no.’”
There's an American joke that "Your friend is the one who comes to bail you out of jail. Your best friend is the one next to you in the cell going, "Duuuude, that was AWESOME!!!!"
It's a joke, but the humor exists because it illustrates the idea that the people really like their enablers. Not everybody would find the joke funny, though I have no idea if Americans in general find it funnier than people from other cultures.
It's a joke, but the humor exists because it illustrates the idea that the people really like their enablers. Not everybody would find the joke funny, though I have no idea if Americans in general find it funnier than people from other cultures.
> There's an American joke that "Your friend is the one who comes to bail you out of jail. Your best friend is the one next to you in the cell going, "Duuuude, that was AWESOME!!!!"
Another stab in the same general vicinity is: "A friend will help you move. A REAL friend will help you move a body."
Another stab in the same general vicinity is: "A friend will help you move. A REAL friend will help you move a body."
>US-centric views of love have evolved more towards ‘if it feels right, do it’
Wikipedia on the early history of Saturday Night Live:
>Drugs were a major problem during the show's first five years. "The value system that was around there was, as long as people showed up on time, did their job, it was nobody's business what they did in their bedroom or in their lives. That value system turned out to be wrong", [Show creator Lorne] Michaels later said. [Original cast member Dan] Aykroyd said that "The cocaine was a problem. Not for me, it was never my favorite... but it was around a lot, and it was affecting the work, the performance, the quality of the scripts... wasting time, and that was bad".
The one exception among cast and crew:
>[Jane] Curtin remained on the show through the 1979–1980 season. Guest host Eric Idle said that Curtin was "very much a 'Let's come in, let's know our lines, let's do it properly, and go' ... She was very sensible, very focused", and disliked the drug culture in which many of the cast participated. Show writer Al Franken stated that she "was so steady. Had a really strong moral center, and as such was disgusted by much of the show and the people around it".
For Curtin to have made it through the first five years of SNL without succumbing to what almost destroyed the show and those who were a part of it—during the 1970s in NYC, the era of Studio 54, no less—is remarkable.
Wikipedia on the early history of Saturday Night Live:
>Drugs were a major problem during the show's first five years. "The value system that was around there was, as long as people showed up on time, did their job, it was nobody's business what they did in their bedroom or in their lives. That value system turned out to be wrong", [Show creator Lorne] Michaels later said. [Original cast member Dan] Aykroyd said that "The cocaine was a problem. Not for me, it was never my favorite... but it was around a lot, and it was affecting the work, the performance, the quality of the scripts... wasting time, and that was bad".
The one exception among cast and crew:
>[Jane] Curtin remained on the show through the 1979–1980 season. Guest host Eric Idle said that Curtin was "very much a 'Let's come in, let's know our lines, let's do it properly, and go' ... She was very sensible, very focused", and disliked the drug culture in which many of the cast participated. Show writer Al Franken stated that she "was so steady. Had a really strong moral center, and as such was disgusted by much of the show and the people around it".
For Curtin to have made it through the first five years of SNL without succumbing to what almost destroyed the show and those who were a part of it—during the 1970s in NYC, the era of Studio 54, no less—is remarkable.
I don't know if you read the article. But there were people trying to intervene, namely his family, and people calling the police to check in on him. However, the people who were on his payroll made an effort to prevent this stuff, and Tony himself saw any kind of intervention as a kind of betrayal.
So generalizing this example and applying it to US culture is off base.
So generalizing this example and applying it to US culture is off base.
[deleted]
d3ntb3ev1l(1)
Most narcos do the same thing. Escobar was powerful, in part, because he donated millions of dollars for the construction of residential units in Colombia.
In the end, he's just another dead junkie. At least he didn't take anyone else with him.
Congrats! Pure evil take!
I'm really sorry he died, even though I was horrified by the externalities of what he did in my town and, frankly, didn't much like the cat personally. But this idea that all of this started when he went to Park City is just not true. The culture of heavy boozing and drugs was very much always a big factor in the Vegas downtown tech scene. I don't think that statement would be considered controversial by anyone who was around for the real surge of it, from about 2010 - 2014 or so. And look, I'm not a Puritan or an abstainer, but it's hard to take people seriously when most of the meetings seem to be done whole day drinking at the casino or by the pool in the Ogden condo.
Whatever. It's all over with now. I didn't even know Tony had left town - he'd stopped really making the scene outside his trailer park long before that. I wish he'd had people who could help him, but he spent a long time being told that he was an instinctual visionary whose every act was an act of genius. That isn't very good for honest self-evaluation.
I wish everything had happened differently, but it didn't. It's a shame.