Now image you've done what seems impossible despite countless people telling you it wont work out. You are in the top 1% of fame. Now someone tells you your other ideas are wrong. And that you cant actually achieve x goal. And that you don't know what you are talking about when you talk about y. And that you are sick and need to take meds to fix yourself.
Would you believe them? Or would you believe yourself?
I think Kanye is sick and needs help but I can see almost anyone falling into the exact same trap hes fallen into if they lived his life.
Slim Shady stands up [0].
[0] - https://iamyourtargetdemographic.com/2011/08/30/kanye-west-v...
So yes, Eminem is still well ahead.
However, in terms of influence on hip hop and pop music as a whole, I think Kanye is above Eminem and it's probably not close. Unfortunately, that's a lot harder to measure.
Kanye likes to claim that his music wasn't about gangster rap and that's why he was sidelined for... a couple years... meanwhile, Dre not only made NWA and Snoop Dogg but managed to convince the entire rap world that a poor white kid with drug problems and abuse issues was the next huge thing by doing things that nobody had ever thought to do before.
his influence is waning
The specific claim was "the most popular rapper/hip hop artist of all time". For that claim, I don't see a good reason why the last decade should weigh more heavily than the decades before.
I love his stuff, Revival, Kamazake, Music to be Murdered by - I probably know 10 songs almost by heart.
But there's no denying that it's been a very different decade for Mathers and not everyone likes it.
I find it basically impossible to empathize with him. I just wouldn't ever be in that situation. "Rising against adversity" is not the story I'd be be using here so much as just a typical strongman bravado leading to an absolute disconnect from reality.
I would wager greatly that it's not that he's grown cynical to people saying he can't do something, but that he's become delusional from people telling him a genius. People who convince themselves that they're smart do this thing where they have an idea, and conclude that because they've come up with it and they're smart that it must be a well reasoned idea.
He's been on a long, slow, downward trajectory with his mental health since the death of his mother and unfortunately there doesn't seem to be anybody looking out for him anymore. It's really sad to watch at this point.
This is an interview from 2005 where Kanye defended gay people when it wasn't exactly popular. Trigger warning for gay slurs.
But you also clearly have no idea who he is and what’s he’s stood for - the guy is single-handedly responsible for turning the tide on Gangster rap.
Here’s one way to put it:
No other man alive today is more responsible for changing negative to positive messages in popular music today.
He’s literally one of the most thoughtful and revolutionary artists alive. But of course you’d have to have listened to his albums from the start and followed along with interviews not just reading all the headlines on Reddit or Twitter.
And no, he hasn’t degraded. Ye, TLOP, Kids See Ghosts, Jesus is King are all massively successful unique pieces of art.
If you only pay attention to the media you’d have your opinion. It’s so out of wack with reality though. But that’s what we have all across this entire forsaken thread - a bunch of totally naive people who aren’t even 1% familiar with his corpus of work or history calling him sick and worse.
That's interesting - I've listened to his music since the beginning and would've assumed the opposite based on his reaction to the South Park Fish Sticks episode. Is there a specific song/album/statement he made that shows support for the LGBT community? As he's turned deeply religious (supports mega churches) + conservative in recent years I'd further expect him to not support LGBT groups.
The comment you replied to has a YouTube link to a 2005 interview where Kanye says on national TV to stop discriminating against gay people.
It's not really a story of rising against adversity though. It's that people who have a lot of success doing something have trouble turning around and doing the opposite. There seems to be a human tendency to double down on what people think got them their success.
That seems to me to be impossible to say with certainty.
Maybe it is a result of mental health issues. But then the premise of his success feels very different.
Something like... a mental illness?
By "his wife" do you mean his ex-wife Kim Kardashian? If so, in what ways is she an asshole?
I think this shows that the commenter is biased and doesn't have the full picture.
Though I was under the impression that her entire brand was showcased on a show where they went over the top being vain, petty, and brandishing the biggest ego's they could muster?
https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2022-183
she's also long been criticized for cultural appropriation,
https://time.com/6072750/kardashians-blackfishing-appropriat...
This describes the whole "beauty" industry. I think this might be a case of "don't hate the player, hate the game". There are also plenty of other celebrities whose success amounts to appearing on some reality TV show and building an empire off of that. Kim Kardashian is not remarkable in this regard, but seems to get more hate than average.
I think it's perfectly sensible to hate the players that perpetuate the game. It's nothing more than a very weak version of the Nuremberg defense.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/02/arts/television/kim-karda...
She's been working on that for nearly four years. And only just passed the 'baby bar' exam this year (The baby bar exam is the exam California gives -first year- law students. It requires a score of 70% to pass. Kardashian has taken four years, and four attempts, to pass the equivalent of the first year of law school).
Much as I hate to say it, those whose lives would be bettered by meaningful prison reform would probably get more out of her doing publicity and fundraising and using her celebrity status to that end, rather than becoming an attorney.
I've been wary of defending Kanye online lately, but Kanye's influence isn't just "rap / hip hop". Kanye also broke into luxury/high-end fashion quite unexpectedly where he was given the same sort of push back. It started with him interning at Fendi (when he already was one of the largest entertainers on the planet) alongside a group of other eclectic individuals (the other most notable one, Virgil Abloh, who would go on to become creative director of Louis Vuitton).
He captured lightning twice and I can't imagine that developing into a personality into anything other than "everyone else is wrong".
That said, I don't think he's become delusional from people telling him he's a "genius", or from mental illness. Since 2020, I've seen scores of people all fall into the internet misinformation pipeline and I don't think Kanye is any different - he just has the largest platform. He's no more mentally ill than your uncle who believed COVID was a hoax. Everything he is saying is currently "mainstream" conservative ideology, his talking points are lifted directly from Candace Owens who is employed by The Daily Wire, which is run by the most famous conservative personality, Ben Shapiro, (maybe after Tucker Carlson).
the secret here is that the emperor has no clothes, and Kanye's fashion garbage is equally as garbage as the rest of the high end fashion culture. It's not that kanye's that good, it's that its all a crock of dogfood with high end price tags and people who won't say anything trying to fit in for access to the wealthy.
This is not something I agree with, I believe there is something like called good taste (http://www.paulgraham.com/goodtaste.html), and just because I don't care to understand it (just like I don't care to understand expensive cars or expensive watches), that doesn't mean the entire field is garbage.
It's overpriced gaslighting dogfood at best, a meat market to gain access to the stupidly wealthy at worst.
Might as well go on to say that all modern art or modern cuisine is garbage, and sound just as ridiculous while doing so.
Spoiler alert: weird artsy high-fashion pieces you see on runways are not expected to be sold or worn in real life. Just like visual design of concept cars isn't what's expected to actually drive on the roads.
A lot of "post modern" art is this idea that it doesn't matter what you think, fuck you, I made this thing and it may even feel purposefully bad, and if I say it's good, it's a valid perspective. Which is really just kind of a post truth drain on society if you ask me; and is a really toxic thing when it's driven by tribalism and mass media to claim "this is good because a lot of people are saying it's good".
High end fashion is not very approachable to most people. A lot of it is just speaking back and forth within a very insular community. Most of it is absurd from the get go. Good art should be evocative of something.
FWIW, Kanye's fashion to me seems like it wants me to call it bad. Dreary. Unattractive. Poor, but.. in a way that seems like its asking for victimization rather than express something about poverty.
And for that I think it's actually bad.
Their line, they want to champion a more "pragmatic" approach to fashion, and "down to earth nature", compared to the big fashion houses.
Demna Gvasalia and his friends all worked at LV, Balenciaga, Maison Margiela, etc.
Vetements in reality? "Down to earth" $1200 track pants, $800 t-shirts, $500 baseball caps, $1500 hoodies.
Given a choice between "trying to break down fashion to be more pragmatic, approachable and down to earth" and "we saw how much money the fashion houses made and we decided we wanted a bigger piece", I know which way I lean.
Edit: in a fit of irony, Balenciaga offered him the role of Creative Director and he went there.
High fashion is obviously a completely different beast. Something that has been pointed out to me recently is how "folk fashion" which focused on meticulous details like beading and cross-stitching was largely the pursuit of women, while modern "high fashion" that involves conceptual flourishes that are relatively simple to produce is more dominated by men. I'm not really sure what to make of this observation yet, but it is interesting.
The treatment of workers in both "every day" fashion and high fashion is deplorable as well and is hard to look past if you're trying to keep an open mind.
I personally wouldn't pay $300+ for them. A lot of his fashion design has a similar utilitarian theme to it, and I believe that the intent with his partnership with GAP was to more or less have an outlet to offer his designs at a more affordable price. Although I could be mistaken.
(I acknowledge the fact that the price of my shoes is because of either some fraudulent factory manager skimming product and/or bad labor practices and that's a bit shitty of me. But they're simple shoes, there is certainly a very high markup on the authentic versions too.)
is he ranked that somewhere?
if so, i'm definitely getting old and out of touch with pop culture, and i'm from the Chicago area so grew up with everything available on the radio.
ranked number 10.
But the interesting thing is that you can see how the rankings favor more recent people, with 80s and 90s artists also up there and with far longer careers, but eclipsed by the more recent people.
His father was a photojournalist for the main newspaper in Atlanta and his mother was a Fulbright scholar. He grew up in a solid middle class suburb and he attended a magnet school for gifted kids before getting a scholarship to the American Acaedmy of Art. He started producing music for artists directly out of high school and was producing for Roc-A-Fella within 3 years of starting out in the music scene.
It was at Roc-A-Fella that he decided to be a rapper, and it took him all of 2 years to produce The College Dropout.
He lived an incredibly charmed life before he ever started rapping.
West has had success as an entertainer and as a businessman - I believe he has a successful shoe company. He's famous. If he thinks he can take on Parler, that seems like a crazy challenge but one he is well equipped to take on. I would certainly believe in myself - even if I thought it was low probability I'd feel certain that it was possible.
They didnt want him to be a rapper, but not for some malicious reason. They loved his beats, but thought no one would care for his songs that were nothing like the mainstream rap at the time, especially since none of them were about bling/drugs/gang stuff. That's just what was selling. And Roc-a-Fella Records wanted their star beatmaker actually making beats for their star rappers, not "pursue dreams". So they allowed him to make that album, thinking the sooner he is done with it, the sooner he will get back to beatmaking.
All of this is confirmed by tons of other people affiliated with Roc-a-Fella Records (like Jay-Z and others) at the time.
They're in on the story.
Unless literally everything said about the matter by everyone involved was an extremely consistent lie that they all conspired to perfectly maintain for 20+ years and ongoing, I find it very difficult to agree with your statement.
Kanye has a song off his album College Graduation where he talks about his initial troubles[1]
[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpbeS15sHZ0&ab_channel=Kanye...
I assure you, I really tried to make sense of what she was saying to me. She was beautiful, and I was interested in her. (I say this to emphasize how hard I was trying to make sense of it all.) But, in the end, I just could not follow. Maybe she had a kind of ADHD. But my point is that her "mental illness" likely went no further than that.
I can't follow Kanye either—though I am far less motivated to do so, by comparison. But, the guy is successful. I'm tempted to give him the benefit of the doubt that, like the young lady in my story, he may know what it is he's saying.
Note: Sorry for dating myself and using a The Simpsons reference.
On the other hand, I often have to speed-watch speeches and lectures, as most neurotypical people stay on the same topic far too long for me to stay attentive. By speed-watching, the subject changes frequently enough for my mind to never start wandering.
So it makes sense his ego would be making it hard to see the world as it is, EVEN IF he didn't have any mental illness at all.
Kanye is a garden variety manic-depressive. It has likely been exacerbated by stress and self-medicating with the wrong drugs, causing instability, paranoia and delusion. Bipolar disorder is genetic, it doesn't develop due to no one being able to say "no" to them.
What you are describing, however, is one way that Narcissistic Personality Disorder can develop. Successful individuals are more at risk of NPD. One of the biggest issues is that NPD patients usually don't suffer, so they rarely seek treatment, which can correct if not cure the disorder in under 2 years, rare among psychological disorders. But the symptoms of NPD not only include an exaggerated sense of self-importance, but also an inability or fear of criticism, and exceptionally strong denial. Narcissists don't listen to anyone, such as those that are trying to help them, yet they require constant admiration.
It is likely West has one of the more benign flavors of NPD, at least, I haven't heard he is violent nor of reports of him berating and belittling others (though I do not follow celebrities). I think his biggest problem is BPD and drug abuse (though the self-medication may be keeping him alive, it is far less than an ideal solution), but due to the combination with NPD and vast wealth, and probably being surrounded by those that will never deny him his insane impulses, he's probably not going to get help until he bottoms out in clinical major depression for months, if he survives it. BPD must be maintained, and if it isn't, inevitably the train leaves the rails.
> I haven't heard he is violent nor of reports of him berating and belittling others
I haven't heard about violence, but berating and belittling others seems common for him - it's practically his brand
Incorrect. There is no single cure for personality disorders, but that doesn't mean they can't be cured. Any mental illness that is not genetic and which develops due to external causes can be cured. There are many personality disorders, of which NPD is one. While there is no single cure for NPD, in fact NPD can be cured in many cases in one of two ways. Some can be cured relatively quickly with an antidepressant, which eliminates the symptoms, but most with NPD can either mitigate the disorder or completely cure it though talk therapy generally in under two years. It's absolutely true that one can learn to stop being an asshole.
Psychedelics could be an interesting line of study for personality disorder treatment as well.
But most importantly, we don't know, so making broad, absolutist claims is a waste of time.
I presume this is because the classification of these disorders is way to broad and unspecific as opposed to hard science diagnostics.
> (…) through talk therapy generally under two years
Would you have a good source for that e.g. a meta study?
Armchair psychiatrists seem to love to diagnoze the people they don't like with various disorders as a way of insulting by proxy.
Since when is a celebrity writing contraversial stuff on Twitter a big deal?
I don't need to catalogue the fallacies to point out why this is not a good idea.
This is also ironically vague and there is literally no ad hominem in there. Word salad is critique of the quality of the discourse, not of the person making it.
Also fallacy fallacy, just for good measure
This is ad hominem. You are ignoring what is said and making a personal attack. That is what ad hominem is, ignoring the argument and attacking the man.
> Do you apply this...
This is ad hominem.
> I don't need to catalogue the fallacies to point out why this is not a good idea.
This is invincible ignorance fallacy.
That said, personally knowing someone is not necessary for psychological diagnosis. All it takes is a few details. I have never met President Trump, but I have no doubt whatsoever he has Narcissistic Personality Disorder simply because he meets the criteria. I have never met President Lincoln, but I have no doubt he suffered from Major Depression. Kanye's symptoms of BPD have been not only in the news, but in the headlines. It is not a difficult diagnosis, and if it took me a minute to realize it, it would take a psychologist seconds. And it doesn't take a psychologist to diagnose an obvious disorder any more than it takes an orthopedic to diagnose a compound fracture or a mechanic to recognize a flat tire.
Here's an example of real ad-hominem: "You are an obnoxious narcissistic piece of shit that thinks every disagreement is a personal insult because you can't stand not being right". If I were to use that sentence in an argument, that would be ad-hominem.
Asking whether or not you apply same standards of not using logical fallacies (from your original comment, I personally doubt it) is not ad-hominem because it's calling you out on asymmetric standards - apparently, you're free to commit logical fallacies as much as you want, but the moment someone else does, you halt all argument and just shout "ad hominem!" without any further elaboration and expect the other person to do the legwork of analysing how and why is the argument fallacious and fix it. That's not good faith discussion.
Incorrect, and this is ad hominem.
>>>>> impression of a deep understanding of
Who is being referred to? Who is being characterized? Certainly not no one. Thus, ad hominem attack.
> you're free to commit logical fallacies as much as you want, but the moment someone else does, you halt all discussion and just shout "fallacy!"
This is ad hominem. But it is also a straw man masquerading as tu quoque.
Also, fallacy fallacy.
> Kanye is a garden variety manic-depressive
> It is likely West has one of the more benign flavors of NPD
> I think his biggest problem is BPD and drug abuse
The rest of the post is either true-sounding-at-first, but completely meaningless claims, or completely obvious things that provide no insight whatsoever.
> NPD patients usually don't suffer
Completely false. Narcissistic injury is extremely painful, and one of the reasons narcissists lash out in the first place.
> [NPD treatment can] correct if not cure the disorder in under 2 years
Also not true. Narcissism is a personality disorder, and "curing" narcissism in 2 years is not common. Everything "can" be done, theoretically, but the implications of the sentence is that Narcissism is somehow special in that regard. It's not.
> but due to the combination with NPD and vast wealth, and probably being surrounded by those that will never deny him his insane impulses, he's probably not going to get help until he bottoms out in clinical major depression for months, if he survives it
So assuming he's NPD, his wealth and sycophants will lead him to destruction? Yeah, quite profound. He also has clinical major depression? Where did that come from?
"Psycho-babble" is a perfectly appropriate description of the original comment.
> Kanye, who is now legally known by his nickname, Ye, was diagnosed with bipolar disorder after being hospitalized for a psychiatric emergency in 2016. In the years since, he’s spoken about experiencing manic episodes, often tweeting and performing through them. He has famously referred to bipolar disorder as his “superpower,” and spoke candidly about the stigma around mental illness on David Letterman’s show in 2019. “I ramp up, I go high,” he said of his episodes, describing feelings of paranoia and delusions, as well as being handcuffed, drugged, and hospitalized.
https://www.google.com/search?q=kanye+npd+narcissist
https://www.google.com/search?q=kanye+drug+abuse+addiction
(In no way is this comment intended to be derogatory towards any party, only citations)
It is not. The question has been settled on a huge scale by historical events.
If illnesses like bipolar disorder or schizophrenia were meaningfully caused by genetic factors, then the Nazi genocide of mentally ill people would have caused a dramatic and lasting reduction in mental illness post-war among the affected population. It didn't.
You might also ask yourself, if something is genetic, shouldn't identical twins (preferably raised apart) both get it or both not get it? Obviously that situation is rare, but researchers do seek out and study instances.
The social construction of the category is embodied by the admission process at a hospital's mental ward. They literally go down the various causes that they can check for a disordered mental state, and if they can't find anything else, that is mental illness, end of story. In fact, lots of abnormal blood tests may be ignored if they don't fit into an obvious pattern.
The meaning of the term is defined by what people with the power to assign it do. There is no abstract essence of it beyond the process as enacted.
It's a label that serves a critical function of allowing society to abandon difficult diagnoses and redirect resources to others permanently. It doesn't represent an illness, but the lack of understanding what it is. This is not at all the same as the (unknown) constituent disorders being unphysical or one single entity.
It's sort of like the "scientific creationists" that keep finding God in the gaps of science. There's always something left, but either you have faith in naturalistic explanations or not. If you aren't satisfied with science, you can't talk as though there is such a thing as scientific fact about the scientifically unknown, and implicitly lump it all together.
Citation needed.
The population of Germany alone in 1940 was over 70M people. The Nazi's killed an estimated 230K disabled individuals, including the physically disabled and the mentally ill. That only accounts for 3 tenths of a percent of the population, but ~50% of any population will be diagnosed with a mental illness at some point in their lifetime, so their efforts were astoundingly insufficient from a mathematical perspective.
But whether someone is bipolar or not is not a simple trait like whether their earlobes are connected or whether they can roll their tongue. A massive genome study identified at least 64 regions of the genome that are associated with an increased risk of bipolar disorder. But even if it were a simple trait, there is such thing as recessive traits, so the Nazi's agenda was, of course, totally insane and could never be successful from a genetic perspective.
Schizophrenia tends to run in families, but no single gene is thought to be responsible. Bipolar disorder is the most likely psychiatric disorder to be passed down genetically. If one parent has bipolar disorder, there's a 10% chance that their child will develop the illness.
I read (ok, skimmed) an academic study that attempted to compare post-war populations with different histories, and failed to find evidence of an effect; if anything the reverse.
I dislike your sophistry about 50% of the population being mentally ill, as if the victims were chosen from that portion at random. So, out of spite, I'm not going to search for the study and you are free to believe that it doesn't exist.
If you have Bipolar disorder you can get tested to see if you have the gene for it. If you don’t then it can’t be passed down.
Source: someone in my immediate family has it and their doctor told them this, got tested, and found out they didn’t have gene for it.
Psych drugs commonly say, or used to say, in the info leaflets something like they "correct imbalances of certain chemicals in the brain".
This is completely made up, and apart from the vagueness, obviously not reasonable when you consider that such drugs usually take a considerable amount of time to have their full effect.
But it's a customary "white lie" (or rather a fiction) to try to sooth patients and keep them confidently on meds. It's not a big secret, or a scandal, but an attempt to manipulate hopefully trusting people for their own good.
As another example of the dynamic, doctors treat patients who are inevitably going to die in the near future, and if they sense the patient is still holding out hope and still wants treatment, they will probably avoid accurately communicating the reality, the number of weeks or days left, and instead say things about progress and remission until the end.
I don't know what context "the gene" for bipolar disorder came up in, but could it possibly be that your family member was obsessed with "the gene" and the doctor humored them? You've heard of sugar pills?
Just think about it... if you've been a success for so long and suddenly aren't, who would you blame? If you didn't say anyone but yourself, you're not Kanye.
I don’t think he’s even recognized as being in the top 3. There are so many much better than him, such as Eminem, Tupac, Snoop Dogg.
I don't want to get off topic here, but talking about Kanye West as "arguably the most popular hip hop artist of all time" should also come with that argument attached to justify such a grandiose statement. I mean, I need to see some Claire Danes w/red yarn vibes to even begin to understand that position.
You can talk of Kanye and Swift in the same sentence (never had a struggle meal, I see your nick Taylor ;) ), but Kanye vs. Nas? Jay? J. Cole? Sheeet, even Em? I don't even know if there are metrics that could make that statement valid unless you restrict it to some weird "early 'aughts" sub-generation.
I challenge thee to numbers, graphs and beyond all - cultural import! <gauntlet slap>
It’s almost as if his whole thing was to successfully market himself to be associated with the title of the “most successful rapper of all time”.
But I have to give him that other than such an illustrious title, I do hear of him in countless contexts other than music: his marriage, his shoes, his renaming himself, his presidential ambitions, his beefs with other actual artists, and now his purchase of 4chan.
Strictly as a rapper he might not be listed as "the best rapper ever", but as a musician he's easily up there.
He is extraordinarily influential in music and hip hop.
Maybe you missed the era where he skyrocketed to the top and spawned a generation of artists that emulate elements of his style to this day.
His impact is undeniable and that’s why you hear about it.
The disconnect is probably that he hasn’t done anything musically relevant in a few years + his mental health has continued to deteriorate in public.
At least try considering the possibility that his lived experience is valid.
I got an early taste of his mental illness. He started maybe 5 songs, each of which he would cut short in the middle to rant about the sound being off. He was completely unhinged and rambling each time. After 20 minutes he simply walked off stage and that was that.
Ever since then, I've found that his illness has been very evident in the art itself. It precludes me from enjoying it, and there's been a number of times I've felt terribly sad seeing these signs celebrated by those who don't see the connection (which is not to suggest that they should).
All that said, I've never even considered this perspective, so thank you for sharing it. It makes a mountain of sense, and makes the whole situation that much sadder (and more complex).
https://slate.com/technology/2015/06/tim-hunt-on-women-scien...
It's almost as if there is something that happens once you have a major, incontestible success, that you come to believe that your victory had little to do with luck and more to do with destiny or some inherent quality that you possess, and therefore the one masterpiece is a shadow of what is to come.
That foolish idea has led to many great follies.
Ok.
> A Twitter rep told The Post on Sunday afternoon that West’s account “has been locked due to a violation of Twitter’s policies.”
> JP Morgan Chase may have notified West of its decision to end its banking relationship with him
> In a statement to CNN Business on Saturday, a Meta spokesperson said content from West’s account was deleted for violating the company’s policies and a restriction was placed on his account.
Doesn't sound like it is a complex if Twitter, Chase, and Meta/FB have all taken actions against him recently.
Can you give specific examples? I just looked this up because I was interested. This very long winded Vice article only seems to point out a few "antisemitic" statements he makes[0]. Here's the first two:
> Ye used a strange metaphor when talking about Black people judging one another, telling Carlson, “Think about us judging each other on how white we could talk would be like, you know, a Jewish person judging another Jewish person on how good they danced or something.”
I've never heard of people hating on Jews because they can't dance. If you watch the clip it sounds like Kanye is just trying to come up with an example, and it's clear he's not "blasting antisemitism" here.
> Ye added, “I prefer my kids knew Hanukkah than Kwanzaa. At least it will come with some financial engineering.” (The belief that Jews control the financial system is one of the oldest and most deeply-rooted antisemitic claims...
Ah yes, the classic joke that Jews are rich. This has been a joke since forever, and maybe it's a bad thing. But Netflix is still playing Seinfeld reruns, and there's way more than one joke in there about rich Jews. There's even an entire episode poking fun at people taking offense to Jewish jokes[1]. And Twitter, Meta, etc aren't blocking Netflix. If joking that Jews are rich is antisemitism that's punishable by banishment from social media, these sites are not enforcing their standards fairly.
I don't really care about Kanye West, but I'm so sick of people claiming everybody is racist, bigoted, and homophobic just because they disagree with something. Show me where Kanye is advocating for the annihilation of the Jews before you go citing baseless claims. And if there is some clear antisemitic statements that I missed coming from Kanye, then I apologize in advance. But right now, it seems like this is just another "this person disagrees with me so let me find some vague statement they said and claim its racist/homophobic/bigoted speech".
[0]: https://www.vice.com/en/article/3ad77y/kanye-west-tucker-car...
[1]: https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0697814/plotsummary?ref_=tt_ov_pl
> Show me where Kanye is advocating for the annihilation of the Jews before you go citing baseless claims.
Now, I didn't say he's been advocating for the annihilation of Jewish people, I said "blasting antisemitism." Antisemitism exists on a spectrum, and advocating for the annihilation of Jewish people is one point very far along that spectrum. If that's your actual threshold, you're definitely going to miss a lot of dogwhistles. But he's gotten pretty alarmingly close to exactly that:
> I'm a bit sleepy tonight but when I wake up I'm going death con 3 On JEWISH PEOPLE.
In case you're not familiar, defcon 3 is an elevated state of military readiness -- that the US hasn't seen since 9/11.
Stuff like investing in property and making sure your children have a career path lined up regardless of your personal success. His anecdote about Stevie Wonder’s kid being forced into a low end job to make ends meet is really sad if it’s true.
It would be helpful if the media didn't post every single thing he's said about Jewish people claiming it's antisemitism, because that just muddies the waters and makes people more apt to believe the media is just lying.
HN sounding off about YE without knowing anything makes me question how I assume the authority of commenters here on other topics.
I've never seen a human being who more obviously "sought the approval of others." He has this weird negative charisma; like there are some people who light up the room by being in it. It's not that he darkens the room -- but it's that he needs the light from others. It just felt like he needed everyone to really like him, and I could so easily see how someone could take advantage of that.
That said, most presidents have had qualifications other than narcissism.
Same situation.
Can't a rich dude buy a company without goofy rumors being spread (scammed into buying Parler)?
Having a celebrity owner increases the value.
And Elon is just a completely normal guy?
In the midst of an uncontrolled manic episode? Often they are not.
Now, responsibility on the larger scale is indeed murky. We societally at once say addicts are and aren't responsible for their behavior (depending upon one's point of view and what acts took place): a drunk driver is treated differently than a homeless addict living under a bridge. Is Kanye 'addicted' to manic states? Should we look down upon him because he won't take his meds? I'm not sure.
Twitter clearly took full advantage of his irrational hard on to get a signed deal. Not “being scammed” in that Twitter very nuch did not seek out the deal, but they certainly fully leveraged his willingness to toss out preconditions any sane purchaser would demand.
> Having a celebrity owner increases the value.
As a mascot, maybe, unless they are polarizing and their area of negative appeal overlaps with the product’s market and their positve appeal doesn’t; but owners are also decision makers, and celebrity’s are going to be all over the map in that role.
(I have no particular reason to believe Musk is in anything less than full control of his faculties.)
This is no where near the same situation. When Elon originally put is offer to buy Twitter, Twitter didn't even want to sell. Then the market crashed and all the sudden Elon's own offer was almost double of the "fair market price" for Twitter.
Elon would be insane if he made the same offer today.
> 6 DE Code § 2705 (2019): Any person who has attained 18 years of age shall have full capacity to contract; provided such person has not been declared legally incompetent to contract for reasons other than age. Any person who has attained the age of 18 years shall become fully responsible for that person’s own contracts.
So I'd presume it would come down to what Delaware's Court of Chancery expects for someone to be "declared legally incompetent to contract." I'd imagine that's not something done lightly.
(IANAL)
Bizarre. In a way, good on them for editing the weirdest stuff out... But really probably shouldn't have used any of it when someone's so clearly in such a bad state?
I mean it really is just driving clicks/views/profit from someone's poor health, in a nasty sort of way (i.e. not to say news or obituaries etc. are bad).
Why Tucker Carlson Pretends to Hate Elites
I think our society has gotten so used to pop stars who are safe, sanitized, vapid graduates of Disney kids, and "transgressive" high artists bravely fighting the against dead horses slain generations ago, that we've lost the capacity to handle artists who can be disturbing and awkward at times, and creatively redeeming at others, but can't easily be categorized as perfectly good or purely evil.
1. https://www.forbes.com/sites/carlieporterfield/2022/10/09/tw...
it'd be great if his name really was that blanked from the public mind, but I don't think that's quite the case with that specific example, yet.
Celebrity or not, his actions seem similar to the mentioned illness.
There is no longer a difference in our society.
I'm pointing out that his behavior could be the result of it, because he's a narcissist, or some combination of the two
You say this as if the latter isn't a direct result of the former.
If this is the case why hasnt someone tried to take power of attorney or something similar here?
There's a lot of stuff there, among other things:
> West said that he often has suicidal ideation. In a 2019 interview with David Letterman, West stated that he has bipolar disorder.
So invoking power-of-attorney over someone isn't always the solution to their mental health. Its an extreme move, and I'm really not sure if its designed to be used in the typical mental-health case.
Its not like the mentally ill are suddenly incapable of performing useful work, or unable to watch over themselves. They just have... delusions, bad memory, swings of mood, terrible sleeping habits, etc. etc. They need help, not someone walking in and stealing their money / taking their house / losing all sense of agency all together.
Mental health is... difficult, but livable. Extreme actions like invoking power-of-attorney probably makes things worse in more situations IMO.
You may be thinking of Legal Guardianship. Power of attorney just means someone is authorized to make the same legal decisions as the subject of the power of attorney and can be overridden by the subject.
Brittany Spears was subject to and abused by Guardianship.
I'm not saying Brittney would have, just saying that it's easier to have a very public manic episode where your every thought is aired than it was 15 years ago.
It should only be done in the most extreme of cases (ie: someone turns into a literal vegetable on life support). If someone still has a degree of agency and capabilities... even if they're delusional and/or mentally ill, they still deserve to live their life. IE: Control their own bank accounts and whatnot.
My grandma is beginning to look like she has dementia. But we, as a family, aren't at a point where we're thinking of taking away her agency. She's a proud woman and always has been.
In many cases, its probably better for the person for them to keep their agency. If they're only going to lose money, its really not that big of a deal. We're more concerned about what if she has a fall by herself or other such issue. But those things won't be solved by revoking her agency.
But just because someone is mentally ill (dementia, bipolar, or even schizophrenic) doesn't mean they deserve to lose their agency and get power of attorney invoked over them.
Has anyone close to you been in a mentally ill situation? Have you ever tried to tell someone you love, someone you trusted, someone you used to look up to that their mental capabilities have declined and that you no longer trust them to watch over themselves? And if so, do you think taking away their ability to use their bank account is the solution to that problem?
This depends on what will happen after they run out of money.
Someone very close to me has an untreated dual diagnosis (mentally ill + substance abuse disorder). She is otherwise young and intelligent, and with treatment she could at least theoretically have a full life. However she refuses all attempts at help, has been unemployed for over a year, is paranoid and isolated and alone from and abusive to friends and family, is burning through her savings, and will soon get to the point where she will have to foreclose on her house.
At that point she will literally be an unemployed, homeless, mentally ill drug addict.
This is a major problem in our individualistic society with no easy answer. As my coach says, people don’t change when they see the light, only when they feel the heat. She may need to crash and burn, and she may pick herself back up. But the odds on that happening for someone in her position are not good.
And meanwhile we all have to watch someone we love slowly descend into ruin.
I have, but it doesn't really look like that. It's a gradual assumption of responsibilities by the caregivers that roughly corresponds to the person's decline.
> do you think taking away their ability to use their bank account is the solution to that problem?
It's a solution, yes, when they could dramatically harm their situation/themselves doing things they no longer have the capacity to understand.
I think in your case, having someone cooperate into giving power of attorney is the best case. But in this case, my grandmother is still too proud to willingly give power of attorney to any of her children.
If she willingly gives it, I think we'll take her up on the offer. But she doesn't think she's been scammed yet. We likely have to wait until after she's realized how she's been taken advantage of before she's in the position to willingly give us power of attorney.
Forcibly taking it before that realization would be counterproductive.
There is, at least in principle (and certainly for people who can afford lawyers, as he certainly can) a very high bar for this. As there should be.
Devil's advocate: there's no way this isn't the case for Kanye, right? Why is this mental illness sparking up later in his life? Why was he able to achieve everything he's achieved 1996 -> 2012 (Roc-A-Fella -> The College Dropout -> My Beautiful Dark Twisted Fantasy era) without these "mental illness" bouts?
This is key to understanding bipolar: it has an "upswing" phase in which someone has more energy and less inhibition. Increased self-belief as well. It can, if you're lucky, be just the right thing to catapult someone into incredible creative works.
The risk is that risk-taking may not pay off, and the inhibitions may have been there for good reason. Not to mention that there's also a downswing phase which looks like depression and comes with elevated suicide risk.
After a few major life disasters (including getting married, and then having it annulled), she eventually figured out that the highs were fun but dangerous. I haven't talked to her in years, but she was reliably taking her meds to keep her even keel.
My friend was pretty self-aware though. Someone less so may not be able to see that their illness is the true cause of their life disasters.
Anyone who has dealt with/supported folks suffering from mental illness (and I definitely qualify, there), will tell you that mental illness gets worse, as you get older.
A young man that compulsively washes his hands, may well end his life, flying around the world in a sterile airplane, keeping his piss in canopic jars.
It's possible that he's exhibited symptoms for far longer but it was brushed aside under the guise of kooky genius. I mean, the Taylor Swift thing was, what, 2009?
[1]: https://anchor.fm/dissect/episodes/S2E1--Kanye-West-The-Elep...
I’m of the opinion he’s both someone with good intentions with good points but who makes those points sideways. But also that he’s mentally I’ll so he’s losing the ability to communicate clearly. I also think Candace Owens is an untrustworthy person with only self serving intentions.
It’s gone now. Memory holed.
Whatever is going on in this individual case, Bipolar disorder is terrible. It can look like someone is "fine" for a long time, but then they aren't fine and people look for what changed, and what changed is progression of the disease.
It's really hard to talk about without adding stigmatization.
Ya know.
"George Bush doesn't care about Black People".
"Taylor, I'ma let you finish..."
MBDTF came out in 2010. That was around the beginning of social media entering the mainstream (Kanye joined Twitter in July 2010).
So up until MBDTF, he didn't have a device in his pocket that allowed him to broadcast his unfiltered thoughts to millions of people. Up until that point, his public image was likely carefully managed by his label and management. All of his interviews were probably overseen by them. They likely only allowed interviews where he was asked pre-approved questions and gave canned answers. If he went too far off script, his label likely stepped in.
It's clear now that he has a lot more freedom with handling his own image. He's been signed to his own label since 2016 which probably afforded him a lot more power over his career. He had a few moments prior to 2016 but he didn't really go off the deep until 2017.
TLDR: what you saw as stable behavior prior to 2017 or so was probably the result of a curated image created by his label and management.
Nobody in their sane mind would say some of the stuff that Kanye said/tweeted, but as well there's very few people who have the ability to profit off making insane statements to the extent that people like Kanye or Trump can. It's almost like a perpetual vicious cycle of profitable victimhood.
I was never a big fan of the guy's work but he was an incredible producer back in the late 90s early 2000s. I think him experiencing the death of his mother was the start of a very serious downward cycle (mentally, at least) that he's yet to recover from.
Fuck! This makes me so scared to get old.
Do or die time for me to have kids. fuck!
> I don't think you can say anything so factual about his life, let alone that he's being scammed.
One thing I think it's possible to say definitively is that he was played by Tucker Carlson's team. The comments they didn't air, like those about Jewish people, are headline making. Any serious journalistic outfit would have aired them. The fact that they cut around them shows that they wanted to paint Kanye in a particular way for their own purposes.
And, as I'm sure will have to be repeated dozens more times on this doomed thread: the mental illness thing isn't hypothetical. He was hospitalized for it, diagnosed, and is open about it. He attributes his success to it!
>Carlson’s program also didn’t air a strange claim from Ye that “fake children” had been placed in his house to manipulate his children. “I mean, like actors, professional actors, placed into my house to sexualize my kids,” he told Carlson. He referred to the “so-called son” of an associate, seemingly to imply the child was fake.
https://www.vice.com/en/article/3ad77y/kanye-west-tucker-car...
I have no idea what exactly he is trying to say and I don't know the context, so it's not clear to me what to make of it.
It's right there in the quote that you pasted. Not sure what context you're missing.
Kanye West is just pushing conspiracies a little further, into the domestic realm.
What's upsetting is that when ordinary John Does promote conspiracy theories they are shunned, but when it's a successful artist we try to find them excuses.
This is, to me, what is missing from this entire thing. Kanye is bipolar, yes, but I don't think anything he's points to some kind of manic outburst. What he said over the past few weeks have be fairly mainstream (or sub-mainstream) conservative talking points. Maybe not the ones that get blasted on Fox News, but the ones that shared and like with Fox News posts on Facebook.
To me the "Kanye is mentally ill" is a cover to hide some very pervasive talking points in conservative circles. It's an extension of the mass misinformation problems that we as a society have been dealing with since COVID and Kanye is the latest victim.
This is what happens in these discussions: people take the genuinely batshit things he's saying and then generalize them to a point where they're merely stupid, and not batshit. Then they say "well, that might be wrong, but it's not crazy!". Well, you're right: it's not crazy. It's also not what he said.
Also, believing members of your family are impersonators or aliens is something young siblings try to persuade one another all the time. It's not unheard of.
Anyway, my larger point is that we should not tolerate antisemitism because of "crazy". Just because one adds outrageous beliefs on top of hate doesn't excuse the hate.
Considering the way the entertainment industry in America uses kids, this is one of the least insane things Kanye has said. Anybody with sense would try to keep their kids away from the entertainment industry, who groom children to be products without regard for their welfare. How many former child actors need to go crazy before you notice the pattern?
When you say crazy things, it is correct to call them crazy.
Every time he says something that deviates from the accepted narrative, he is attacked and dismissed as "crazy", "insane", "sick". Many non-normative geniuses throughout history have been treated in this manner.
Before anyone strawmans this, he does occasionally say things that should be condemned, particularly over the past week. Understandably people are focused on those remarks, but two things can be true at the same time.
1. He has been systematically marginalized and labeled as "crazy" every time he presents an alternative viewpoint. This has been going on for years.
2. He overcorrects when placed in a box. The more people try to control him, the more he tries to break out of that box by being purposefully provocative.
The irony here is I'm not condemning West. I'm recognizing the terrible situation he's in. It's your analysis that's uncharitable to him, not mine. I think he's a victim in this story.
> He is open about having been diagnosed, not about having a "public breakdown", being "increasingly unhinged" or "quite evidently sick". Those are your inventions.
Did the self-proclaimed HN doctors question his decision to collaborate with Adidas, Nike, etc by becoming a fashion designer with his Yezzy label which made him a billionaire? They didn't care in the first place; but because of Parler now they care?
> 1. He has been systematically marginalized and labeled as "crazy" every time he presents an alternative viewpoint. This has been going on for years.
> 2. He overcorrects when placed in a box. The more people try to control him, the more he tries to break out of that box by being purposefully provocative.
Well the same people who are calling him "crazy", "insane", "sick" are the same who believe everything that is said by the media. You go against the media narrative and they will punish you. Criticising and exposing some of the media's lies and the cancelling will happen.
Would you say the same about a schizophrenic who refuses to stay on his meds and ends up ranting at people while living under a bridge?
People with bipolar disorder sometimes won't take their meds for a variety reasons, one being they seek the energy of manic episodes (one in my acquaintance had only had one major manic episode in her entire life but she put up with depression for years in hope of having another one).
Kanye West has stated in interviews that he's a.) bipolar and b.) doesn't take his meds because they interfere with his creative process. This man is not well.
No, because Kanye isn’t living under a bridge. He’s a billionaire.
Second, it's not clear what statement by The Gap he's talking about, but my guess is that this is related to the delayed launch of his product line:
https://www.billboard.com/culture/lifestyle/kanye-west-gap-p...
The "coordinated message" here appears to be "it is bad that children were killed".
It's a (sad) reality that if you're doing any kind of public relations you need to plan for the very real possibility that your giant brand launch is going to coincide with a national tragedy.
0. https://www.cnn.com/2020/06/04/entertainment/kanye-west-two-...
I find this take interesting -- Kanye is insanely successful in multiple categories. He is very eccentric and always has been.
> Kanye is now a Black Hebrew Israelite
That said, calling him mentally ill or having a breakdown is a bit... odd. There are tens of thousands of "Black Hebrews", there are MANY more Scientologists. Is Tom Cruise mentally ill? Maybe, but people can have different beliefs than me and I wouldn't call them mentally ill.
Regarding Pete Davidson...
> “The 78 media outlets that called me an abuser when I was tryna get that heroin addict away from my kids that was tattooing my kids’ names on him, Skete, Pete Davidson…” said West. Davidson has spoken about his struggles with drugs and borderline personality disorder in the past.
https://news.yahoo.com/kanye-west-hits-pete-davidson-0413485...
I think a lot of the tabloid press is trying to make Kanye sound crazier than he is. That's how they sell stuff. Don't get me wrong, he's a bit off and he'll say things in a hyperbolic way (which is accurate.. but the connected dots don't always make sense).
Anyway, my point is I think dismissing someone as "mentally ill" for having different beliefs or opinions is probably not the best. It's a fair opinion, but I wouldn't assess it that way. He's acting rationally for his belief set.
Kanye himself has said, in the past, that he has bipolar disorder and has had manic episodes. His family has corroborated that, and his wife was open about taking responsibilities during the bad days.
There are no ads on HackerNews. What’s the point ?
Believing in a lot of conspiracy theories, in isolation, also doesn’t make someone “crazy”.
I don’t know the man, neither does anyone here so far.
My interest is in seeing more social media migrate to open, federated protocols.
His wife's new boyfriend got their kids' initials tattooed on his neck. That's deranged and suggesting that an angry response is evidence of mental illness is way into "positing unnecessary entities" territory.
This is a black man who is a unicorn in two industries. One of the most successful black people of all time. Who is fighting to establish black ownership in those industries.
Here’s his latest full interview where he goes into detail on what he’s been saying. I highly encourage you to watch at least the first 20 minutes:
https://odysee.com/@ArchAngel:e/Ye-on-The-Media-The-Kardashi...
“I respect what the Jewish people have done and how they brought their people together” he isn’t just spewing anti semitism he’s making a principled stand for his people owning more of the industries they run and airing specific problems. Feel free to engage with them.
(YouTube is censoring it because I guess you can critique whites and other ethnic groups all you want, but not Jews). I’m not endorsing anything here, but it’s clear he’s far within the realm of sanity. Accusations against someone’s sanity are of the ultimate nature, it’s a shame you lob them so.
But in it he actually clearly addresses everything you mention: Pete, Gap, Corey, and more. All of your points he has logical explanations for and I highly doubt you’re familiar with then since it seems you only follow Instagram posts, which is ludicrous.
In it I hear someone who is incredibly well controlled, who is speaking clearly and logically, and who has legitimate greviances borne out of experience. In fact I was surprised, as he’s always been a bit of a spaz in interviews (nothing too unusual, just within range ADHD, stress, narcissism would be my guess), so I was expecting worse. But if anything he seems more rational and grounded than ever.
Do you know what he meant by death con 3?
Because he explains it himself in the video and it’s not untoward like you’re implying.
Again, maybe listen to the guy you want to slander for 20m.
I just don't understand the phenomenon of people moving from one day/week to the next, with a social media influencer or MSM feeding them the next thing to care about. I would be more dismissive of it, but when it starts spilling over into real life; workplaces, road rage, etc. - it is detrimental to society. At what point do people see this for what it is and wake up?
I read that unlike Elon he didn't sign a binding deal to buy for a set price. Just an agreement to consider a purchase. So if he's "sick", apparently not as much as other people.