5 ms·

for every gifted, motivated, positive, constructive person in the world, there are probably 100,000 that want to tear them down and eat the carcass.

llamaimperative 2y ago
No there’s not. This is what narcissistic assholes tell themselves when someone calls them out for being a narcissistic asshole.
roywiggins 2y ago
10,000 people is as many people as some entire towns, I don't think society would hold together very long if it were true. 100,000 supposes that there are... hmm... about eighty thousand non-evil people in the world, and (odds are) exactly none of them are Marshallese and about 2 are Samoan, to give a sense of how silly this is.
- Log_out_ 2y ago
  It doesn't . But usually that third of the population is busy going for each others throat and ignoring the "fools" while then taking the coins that mysteriously spawn near those as psychopath price mobey.
  - BobaFloutist 2y ago
    Oh, so for every 2 good people there's actually 1 bad person. That's a very different ratio.
- Clent 2y ago
  I think you are assuming there are a unique 10,000 people for each gifted individual. I think it safe to say there is overlap and that those 10,000 people are each going after several gifted people. You also appear to be assuming there are no mid range people who everyone ignores, that is going to be the majority of the population.
- ozim 2y ago
  But those people don’t have to be evil all the time. Society holds well if someone steals a candy from the shop. Those people can become shitty and despicable for that one person they envy and can be great for their friends and family all the other time.
cjsawyer 2y ago
I believe the opposite. The issue is that destroying requires much less effort than creating.
- cutemonster 2y ago
  You can have both at the same time: Say, 15 who want to help them, and 5 who would want to hurt them. And then you can be right both of you. Although the angry ones would be harder to see (sychopants)
  - ozim 2y ago
    Even better imagine people don’t have to be mean/awful all the time. They can be shitty for a coworker and then be great for friends and family or be great for people at other job. There are really evil people that might be shit all the time but society is rather good at spotting them.
- CamperBob2 2y ago
  Also, those who want to destroy are easier to herd than those who want to create, or even those who just want to maintain the status quo.
zxexz 2y ago
The world does not work like that. Sure, for every person, there may be 100_000 that do not share their ideals. But even 10/100_000 would seem ridiculously high as a percentage of people who actively try to destroy and cannibalize the work of others to showcase their own. Another commenter said it here - it's easier to destroy than create. I guess by my vibe-based estimates, it's at least 1_000 times easier to destroy than create, in aggregate.
simplify 2y ago
Only in low-trust societies. Modern, higher-trust society can only function because this isn't true.
smaudet 2y ago
There is probably a high percentage of tearing down, I doubt its so extreme. I think maybe 1 in 100k is actually anything special, but odds are you aren't special, you just noticed that 20% of the population is as gifted/motivated/constructive as you are (statistically speaking, assuming a bell curve). And of those, yes, some small percentage will still feel "special" and affronted that other people have the same ideas/goals/desires as them. It's a rat race and it's not your fault.
WalterBright 2y ago
[flagged]
- llamaimperative 2y ago
  Yet oddly enough, the vitriol didn't turn up against him when he was creating awesome stuff, but when he was creating awesome stuff and behaving like a monstrous asshole. Curious! (There are plenty of people bandwagonning on Musk hate, and definitely some for his political bent, but there are also plenty of totally valid and non-political reasons to have disdain for him)
  - Dalewyn 2y ago
    I remember plenty of naysayers claiming that Musk was going to go broke with Tesla and SpaceX, driven more by vitriol than fiscal arguments. Astronomers (and only astronomers) also hate Starlink. I'm going to agree with Walter that it's just human nature to want to drag down the successful. Envy is one of the seven deadly sins, after all.
    - llamaimperative 2y ago
      That's why you see everyone losing their goddamn minds over Warren Buffet. They just can't stand to see success. Jensen Huang. Michael Dell. John Mars. Alain Wertheimer. Phil Knight. Dustin Moskovitz. People literally just trawl the most-successful-people list and find folks to hate. Simple as.
      - shermantanktop 2y ago
        Mark Cuban is an interesting in-between case. But yes, you have shown that wealth doesn’t do it; but wealth and an appetite for publicity (especially for wealth-related attributes) seems a solid predictor.
        llamaimperative 2y ago
        Part of that correlation is because one of the best ways to get publicity, as Musk has discovered, is to be a monstrous asshole. Of course you can also get it for philanthropic acts, but Musk doesn't, again because he's an asshole.

llamaimperative 2y ago

No there’s not. This is what narcissistic assholes tell themselves when someone calls them out for being a narcissistic asshole.

roywiggins 2y ago

10,000 people is as many people as some entire towns, I don't think society would hold together very long if it were true. 100,000 supposes that there are... hmm... about eighty thousand non-evil people in the world, and (odds are) exactly none of them are Marshallese and about 2 are Samoan, to give a sense of how silly this is.

Log_out_ 2y ago
It doesn't . But usually that third of the population is busy going for each others throat and ignoring the "fools" while then taking the coins that mysteriously spawn near those as psychopath price mobey.
- BobaFloutist 2y ago
  Oh, so for every 2 good people there's actually 1 bad person. That's a very different ratio.
Clent 2y ago
I think you are assuming there are a unique 10,000 people for each gifted individual. I think it safe to say there is overlap and that those 10,000 people are each going after several gifted people. You also appear to be assuming there are no mid range people who everyone ignores, that is going to be the majority of the population.
ozim 2y ago
But those people don’t have to be evil all the time. Society holds well if someone steals a candy from the shop. Those people can become shitty and despicable for that one person they envy and can be great for their friends and family all the other time.

cjsawyer 2y ago

I believe the opposite. The issue is that destroying requires much less effort than creating.

cutemonster 2y ago
You can have both at the same time: Say, 15 who want to help them, and 5 who would want to hurt them. And then you can be right both of you. Although the angry ones would be harder to see (sychopants)
- ozim 2y ago
  Even better imagine people don’t have to be mean/awful all the time. They can be shitty for a coworker and then be great for friends and family or be great for people at other job. There are really evil people that might be shit all the time but society is rather good at spotting them.
CamperBob2 2y ago
Also, those who want to destroy are easier to herd than those who want to create, or even those who just want to maintain the status quo.

zxexz 2y ago

The world does not work like that. Sure, for every person, there may be 100_000 that do not share their ideals. But even 10/100_000 would seem ridiculously high as a percentage of people who actively try to destroy and cannibalize the work of others to showcase their own. Another commenter said it here - it's easier to destroy than create. I guess by my vibe-based estimates, it's at least 1_000 times easier to destroy than create, in aggregate.

simplify 2y ago

Only in low-trust societies. Modern, higher-trust society can only function because this isn't true.

smaudet 2y ago

There is probably a high percentage of tearing down, I doubt its so extreme. I think maybe 1 in 100k is actually anything special, but odds are you aren't special, you just noticed that 20% of the population is as gifted/motivated/constructive as you are (statistically speaking, assuming a bell curve). And of those, yes, some small percentage will still feel "special" and affronted that other people have the same ideas/goals/desires as them. It's a rat race and it's not your fault.

WalterBright 2y ago

[flagged]

llamaimperative 2y ago
Yet oddly enough, the vitriol didn't turn up against him when he was creating awesome stuff, but when he was creating awesome stuff and behaving like a monstrous asshole. Curious! (There are plenty of people bandwagonning on Musk hate, and definitely some for his political bent, but there are also plenty of totally valid and non-political reasons to have disdain for him)
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  I remember plenty of naysayers claiming that Musk was going to go broke with Tesla and SpaceX, driven more by vitriol than fiscal arguments. Astronomers (and only astronomers) also hate Starlink. I'm going to agree with Walter that it's just human nature to want to drag down the successful. Envy is one of the seven deadly sins, after all.
  - llamaimperative 2y ago
    That's why you see everyone losing their goddamn minds over Warren Buffet. They just can't stand to see success. Jensen Huang. Michael Dell. John Mars. Alain Wertheimer. Phil Knight. Dustin Moskovitz. People literally just trawl the most-successful-people list and find folks to hate. Simple as.
    - shermantanktop 2y ago
      Mark Cuban is an interesting in-between case. But yes, you have shown that wealth doesn’t do it; but wealth and an appetite for publicity (especially for wealth-related attributes) seems a solid predictor.
      - llamaimperative 2y ago
        Part of that correlation is because one of the best ways to get publicity, as Musk has discovered, is to be a monstrous asshole. Of course you can also get it for philanthropic acts, but Musk doesn't, again because he's an asshole.