Die Loser:  Why We Are Killing Ourselves More, and What’s the Cure?

We are killing ourselves more than we used to. According to both the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the UK Department of Health, suicides rates have doubled since the great recession of 2008. This is not to do with poverty per se, but is crucially connected to our perception of our own lack of success: in particular to the fall in status we perceive when others can see we have failed. We are lowered in the eyes of others, so, out of shame, we erase ourselves.

In the US, the largest increase is among the over 50s, with a 60% increase in the number of women of the baby boomer generation committing suicide (with men not far behind with a 50% increase). This was the generation who were told that they could have it all if they believed in themselves and that they’d never had it so good. “The increase coincides with a decrease in financial standing for a lot of families over the same time period … There may be something about that group, and how they think about life issues and their life choices that may make a difference,” suggests CDC deputy director Ileana Arias, implying that the suicides have more to do with perception of self-worth than with per capita poverty. “The boomers had great expectations for what their lives might look like,” comments Julie Phillips, associate professor of sociology at Rutgers University, who has published research on rising suicide rates: “So many expected to be in better health and expected to be better off than they are, surveys suggest they had high expectations. Things haven’t worked out that way in middle age.” Time magazine has reported that, “Surveys of baby boomers have shown a tone of disappointment … dashed expectations, economic woes, depression or chronic medical problems,” and asks, “Are unrealistic life expectations to blame for baby boomer suicides?”

While there is, as yet, no incontrovertible proof of a correlation between high expectations and an increase in suicide—and, even if there were, correlation does not prove causation—nonetheless, similar findings from countries as culturally different as the US, India and South Korea point to high expectations as the common factor in the rise in suicide rates. The two demographics across these three cultures that have seen the greatest increase in suicides are people within high expectation career brackets: students and doctors.

A comprehensive review by John Hopkins University, surveying the risk factors for suicide and depression among Asian-American teenagers and students found that pressure to perform was an important factor. Asian-American youths—especially Asian-American females—have the highest rates of suicide among Americans, by ethnic group. The report lists concerns over school performance, lack of parental support and fear of failure as largely responsible for the pervasiveness of suicide and depression within the community. CNN claims that the findings reveal that the “push to achieve” is “tied to suicide in Asian-American women.”

In an article in the Pacific Standard, in 2015, which discusses the motivations that drive Asian-American students to suicide, Jennifer Chen writes, “We want to make our parents proud, no matter how hard they push us … it’s no wonder that these festering feelings of worthlessness and failure (which can’t be talked about) boil over into a raging, suicidal mess.”

The same problem has emerged in India, alongside its dramatic economic growth. According to a 2012 Lancet report, India has one of the world’s highest suicide rates for youth aged fifteen to twenty-nine. The National Institute of Mental Health and Neurosciences (Nimhans) conducted a study on the growing number of suicides among school and college students in India. It revealed that 11% of college students have attempted suicide. According to the Hindustan Times, “Conversations with counselors revealed that young people find it difficult to cope with failure in examinations and careers and neither families nor other social institutions offer adequate support or solace.” This is not about poverty. Sikkim, the state with India’s highest suicide rate, is India’s third richest state per capita income and is undergoing rapid economic expansion. Shaibya Saldanha, co-founder of the NGO Enfold India, believes that, “These deaths result from poor relationships with parents, excessive expectations, the feeling of being unwanted.” Meanwhile, over the same time frame, in developing countries with widespread poverty and economic stagnation, the levels of reported suicides have remained constant — at close to negligible.

The most alarming suicide rise is found in South Korea, a highly industrialized nation with fast economic growth and high per capita income. South Korea has the highest suicide rate of all the OECD nations. Scientists have questioned why such an economically successful state has such a high suicide rate. According to the Berkeley Political Review, South Korea is a “counterexample to the prevailing belief that happiness is related to the economic success of a society. As the economy grew, the stress in South Korean society increased, as did the rates of depression and suicide.” The two groups with the highest suicide rates are the young and the elderly. In the case of the young, the problem is the stress resulting from the expectations being placed upon them academically:

Korean children have a school year of 11 months and often spend over 16 hours a day at school … All this studying is done to get into the top three universities in South Korea, all of which are known for their miniscule acceptance rates. Family prestige and honor are often tied to where children go to university, and many adolescents take their own lives out of that stress.

According to the Berkeley Political Review, “Lonely, poor, and worried about not only their own livelihoods but those of their families, many of South Korea’s older people commit suicide so as to not levy a financial burden on family members.”

A comparable problem in the US has been dubbed the scourge of physician suicide. High earning, well-educated doctors have a suicide rate 1.87 times higher than that of the average American—among female doctors the rate is 2.87. A 2016 study showed that 11% of medical students have suicidal thoughts. Pamela Wible MD, cited in MD magazine, explains that “many doctors don’t reach out for help because of privacy issues and high expectations for performance.” As John Demartini, a leading authority on human behavior, explains, “Any time we feel guilty or shameful and are not living up to some idealistic expectations (such as sustained fame, fortune, saintliness, influence, or power), suicidal thoughts can enter our minds.”

It’s all about expectations, even for us average people. But yet, when we are feeling low, doubting ourselves or feeling like failures, we have a tendency to keep on pumping ourselves up with even higher hopes, while at the same time numbing ourselves to our disappointing outcomes. One of the ways we stop feeling bad about failing to live up to our own expectations is to remove the negative emotions we have about ourselves—by blocking them. In excess of 70 million prescriptions for antidepressants were handed out in the UK in 2018 (compared to 53 million in 2013), while antidepressant usage has increased by almost 400% in the US over the past two decades.

The use of SSRIs is soaring in the developed world—further evidence that we are making ourselves miserable by trying to live up to unrealistic standards. We were overly optimistic about what we could achieve and, now that we have failed, we simply destroy our capacity for negative thought and self-doubt. Antidepressants are another example of the harm we unintentionally inflict upon ourselves under the regime of enforced positivity. SSRIs have many adverse side effects: studies show that they are linked to obesity. Ironically, both coming on and off SSRIs can lead to an increase in the symptoms the drugs are designed to deal with, most notably suicidal ideation. SSRIs also remove inhibitions, slow down reaction times—and result in erectile dysfunction for men and a lack of libido for both sexes, which places a strain on relationships. They can lead to reduced sympathy and empathy: many users report a sense of emotional disconnection and distance from others. This may be connected to an increase in risky and violent behavior, according to a 2010 study from the Institute for Safe Medication Practices, which found “five antidepressants to be among the 10 prescription drugs most disproportionately linked with reports of violent behaviour.”

I can anecdotally confirm these findings. I took Sertraline (Zoloft), an antidepressant, for approximately two years, and, during that time, although it stopped me from worrying about my failure as a father with a family to support, the side effects caused me to fail at other things. These side effects included an increase in reckless behavior, lack of affect and empathy, memory loss, lack of motivation, poor concentration and—worst of all—the drugs completely removed my will to be creative. I stopped coming up with good ideas because antidepressants take away the edge and urgency required to create something original, to be moved by emotion and to reflect deeply. As a freelancer creative, that’s not good news economically. Even the drugs that we take to blot out our fear of failure cause us to fail in other ways.

No wonder we’re doping ourselves up. Our advertisements, governments, schools, businesses and friends all tell us that we each have the opportunity and the right to be all we can be, that we’re already awesome, that all we have to do to be a success is be ourselves and believe in ourselves. So, when we fail to reach our goals, it can only be — the argument goes — we ourselves who are to blame. We can now fail on many fronts that never existed before: with all our new consumer choices, freedoms and rights come new opportunities for a total lack of success. So we can all now fail at DIY and home décor and home cooking and getting the perfect body or the ideal partner. Gay people can now fail at marriage and women can fail at being CEOs, forty-year-olds can fail at having children, fifty-year-olds can fail at being found attractive or at finding work after a life of service to one company that has started downsizing. Men can fail in measurable new ways from having a low sperm count to failing to keeping up with the latest innovations in the digital revolution and becoming unemployable as a result. We have never before had such apparent choice and so much competition in daily life, with such fast career change turnarounds. The gig economy offers so many apparent opportunities—but it has also multiplied the number of avenues to perceived failure. No one—apart from the creators of gig-economy jobs—is ever going to get promoted to a higher level within a gig-economy job. You work at it till you burn out, then someone else—poorer, younger, more energetic and hungry—will take your place.

Philosopher Byung-Chul Han claims that the twenty-first century culture of productivity and excessive positivity is causing unprecedented psychological burnout. In our achievement culture, we push ourselves, believe in ourselves and sell ourselves 24/7—we even have apps that count the number of steps we take in a day. And we are seeing an increase in neuropsychiatric diseases, such as ADHD, chronic fatigue syndrome, depression and BPD. Han claims that buying into the yes, we can culture of perpetual positivity ties us to a life of self-exploitation until we collapse from “exhaustion, fatigue and suffocation.” We can’t all be winners, and no amount of believing in ourselves and yelling yes, we can will change that.

As sociologist Zygmunt Bauman has been warning us for over three decades, in our increasingly liquid modernity, the building blocks with which we’re attempting to build our lives are all short term, ungrounded: we never get past building the first floor before the foundations are swept away and we have to start again. The plan for life—like the job for life, and the partner for life—is becoming a thing of the past, and we have so many more thresholds of change at which to fail.

The anxieties over how we are seen by others have also been amplified over the past decade by social media — a technology which operates almost entirely on interpersonal displays of status. In over fifty well documented cases in the UK, teenagers whose self-image has been destroyed by cyber bullying have gone on to take their own lives. We even have a name for this: bullycide. In a culture with high expectations of social status—in which people literally like and share images and information about their performative selves—to be singled out as a reject, means, for, some young people, that life has lost all meaning. One tweet by a cyberbully of the fifteen-year old Canadian suicide Amanda Todd reads Die, Loser!—an expression that implies that being a loser has only one possible outcome: death.

If you believe you’re going to be successful by the standards of modern high-tech society, you are doomed to failure. Statistically, you don’t stand a chance. You’re going to be a failure. Dozens of times, and maybe permanently. And if that means that you feel so hopeless that you might as well kill yourself, that is a problem.

Most of us experience a sense of being disappointed in ourselves periodically, but holding unrealistic expectations over an extended period of time, and failing to re-adjust our expectations towards likely outcomes, leads to shame and guilt that can in turn prompt despair and suicidal ideation. As the Stoics demonstrated, and as Rational Emotive Behavioral Therapy and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (both of which are grounded in Stoic philosophy) show, lowering one’s expectations for outcomes for oneself is a powerful tool for dispelling feelings of self-hatred and thoughts of suicide. In fact, CBT uses the technique of contextual grounding or belief work in the treatment of people at risk of suicide. The cure is to stop worrying about whether you’re perceived as a failure. Though that’s a hard thing to do.

According to a paper by CBT specialist and practitioner John D. Mathews:

depressed suicidal patients view themselves as defective, inadequate, diseased or deprived and thus worthless and undesirable; they view others as rejecting and unsupportive by making too many demands; and they view the future as hopeless as they do not believe they have the internal or external resources to solve their problems.

The cognitive aspect—how one perceives one’s situation—is key. The techniques used by CBT therapists are further evidence of the connection between high expectations and suicidal ideation. The method of cure they offer involves drastically reducing one’s expectations for oneself and one’s future and accepting pain.

Mathews explains that, “The focus of CBT in the depressed suicidal patient is to identify the unsolvable problem; reduce cognitive distortions and errors in logic with regards to his or her view of self, others and future.” For example, in the case of a patient with the core belief I’m a failure, the therapist would first have the patient re-frame the maladaptive belief in less severe terms, such as having a weakness does not mean that I’m a total failure. The therapist then works to help the patient “improve problem solving skills; increase motivation to problem solve; reduce perceived emotional pain; and encourage acceptance of emotional pain as part of everyday life.”

There it is—we must accept pain and accept being a minor failure. But we are addicted to the endless judging of ourselves and others as losers. We put others down in order to buoy ourselves up: the majority of our reality TV entertainment is based on such rituals of status humiliation. We rally against the unfairness of our fate: we protest that we live in a winner-takes-all economy, in which the 1% have all the wealth and fame and the 99% suffer in obscurity, relative poverty and silence.­ We cling to our data on success and failure and numerically test our satisfaction levels constantly. Of the millennial generation, according to Time magazine, “40% believe they should be promoted every two years, regardless of performance.” Tests like those conducted at Harvard in 2013 show that, although 40% of people under twenty-six believe that they will be famous, 89% believe, by the age of forty-eight, that they have underachieved or are disappointed with their lives. This is in spite of our material wealth in the west — data that we don’t like to admit. Even the poorest people living in modern high-tech societies enjoy a degree of material prosperity and health that was unthinkable a hundred years ago. A television, internet, mobile phones, running water, a home with one bedroom per person and central heating are now rights to be provided for by welfare. Other rights include free schooling, state broadcasting, free libraries and emergency health care. The expectations that we subject ourselves to are now so high and unrealistic that to be quietly average and survive without discomfort is seen as a failure. From the perspective of a poor urban family in the nineteenth century, forced to work in a poorhouse, with child labor, dysentery and five children to a bed, everyone in the modern world, even those living on benefits, is a huge success.

But we don’t see it that way.

How can we stop killing ourselves, metaphorically and literally, for feeling like losers? By fighting for a world in which everyone is a winner? By destroying the successful, so that no one gets to humiliate us with the scale of their success?

No. By reducing our expectations of success. Drastically. And accepting failure and pain.

It works.

Anyone up for that?

If you enjoy our articles, be a part of our growth and help us produce more writing for you:


  1. Black American homicide rate nearly doubled between 1960 and 1970…nearly halved between 1990 and 2000. What was the cause of such dramatic reversals?

  2. “Anyone up for that?”

    Nope. I still want my suicide rights, in the form of a negative legal right to buy sodium pentobarbital. My reasons are mine alone and no one else’s business.

    It’s quite presumptuous to assume that it’s a government’s job – or a journalist’s job – to reduce the suicide rate. If you want to keep living, keep living. If you want to kill yourself, kill yourself. Why on Earth would I pretend it’s my job to coerce or judge you, as long as you don’t piss on my liberty to make a different choice for myself?

    1. @Andaro: I understand what you’re saying and I agree to a very narrow extent. However, if we live in a society where suicide is rampant among the young then I do feel that there is a societal obligation for this to be looked into so as to diminish the causes. By the way, if I saw you trying to kill yourself I would do my utmost to coerce you out of it, even if you felt it infringed on your liberty. I wouldn’t see this as my ‘job’ or me being a ‘do-gooder’ but a natural reaction in wanting to save someone’s life.

      1. If something causes negative quality of life and can be identified and removed without huge external costs, then you should probably do this *whether or not it leads to suicides*.

        I’m sure you feel benevolent when you try to coerce others – including well-articulated adults like me who explicitly disagree on that – from having suicide options. But your subjective feeling of benevolence doesn’t change the fact that you’re harming my interests in doing so, and forcing negative utility on me against my will. And unfortunately, that is the #1 cause for my motivation to harm people like you, politically and otherwise.

        It’s a massive error of judgment on your part, with huge unnecessary costs on both sides. Thanks for caring, I guess; I just wish you cared enough to actually avoid making this massive mistake.

      2. It is people such as yourself with good intentions (who are in the majority) that think all mental illness can be cured and that if we go to enough psychologists and psychiatrists we will find the right one and will suddenly experience relief. This is a naive assumption and causes enormous distress to those who are “treatment resistant”, as it means we do not have any options to relieve our pain other than suicide. Euthanasia should be available to anybody who wants it, however it is because of people such as yourself who require us to suffer through the pain until we begin to experience the joy of physical pain as we age and then become completely immobile and well as cognitively incapacitated. If that isn’t enough we still have to wait until the good lord takes us so that we can have what is considered to be a virtuous death and so that people such as yourself do not have to experience any guilt.

    2. Yes the quest for success can lead one to suicide, however I believe this to be more of a structural issue that is not just confined to a particular demographic or country.
      We live within a capitalist structure that encourages greed and discourages compassion, so is it any wonder why this trend continues. I question the accuracy of the stats regarding the suicide rate in developing countries – do they even have the resources to record accurate stats, particularly in rural areas? In western countries the stats are also dubious, particularly in the case of overdose. Many people kill themselves via overdose, yet instead of the coroner recording the death as a suicide it is often recorded as an overdose. This is extremely problematic as it exaggerates the issue with addiction such as opiates and omits information regarding how severe the suicide issue is. The therapeutic treatments mentioned in the article may work for some, however the idea that one should just simply accept their circumstances and not strive for more seems like it is more likely to lead to depression rather than recovery. I have actually tried that myself and I end up becoming more suicidal, at least if I have a goal and point of focus it takes my mind off the reality that I am not successful and unlikely to ever be. Most people who want to be successful are not asking for much, for me personally it is a matter of obtaining competence in a particular field of interest and being able to generate an income that will enable to avoid financial stress, I do not think this is too much to ask, yet it appears to be unobtainable.
      The goal of lowering the suicide rate is a noble one, but it is unrealistic and naive. It is human nature to attempt to avoid pain, and neurological studies have shown that emotional pain is actually more intense than physical pain, therefore it makes sense that people will resort to suicide in an attempt to alleviate their pain. I don’t think anybody has the right to tell another adult what to do with their life, and the self righteous attitude that the majority of people have in respect to suicide only serves to be counterproductive, in that it creates a paternalistic mentality that implies that people who are suicidal do not know what they are doing and have succumbed to distorted thinking, as opposed to them being realists who understand that to continue with their miserable existence is futile and they are simply taking a more intelligent approach to resolve their predicament. In order to understand suicide more effectively perhaps the question that should be asked is why DON’T people commit suicide? Life is full of suffering, and regardless of whether you are wealthy or not the fact that you exist guarantees suffering in some form, this is the antinatalist perspective.

  3. Unfettered capitalism propped up by the state when necessary is the west’s premier sacred cow. Any suggestion that a radically individualistic society with weak family ties in which the only accepted metric for success is how much stuff one buys and how much money one makes, and in which the state and the economy both serve the interests of the top sliver of income earners, might negatively affect the populace as it struggles to stay afloat in a world that no longer recognizes a common good or shared social responsibility is met with incredulity or rants about the dangers of communism. Very interesting, no? Data shows quite clearly that as neoliberal capitalism spread throughout North America and Europe it was accompanied by a rise in mental health problems, homelessness and all kinds of social stress, all of which fray the fabric of the afflicted society. But let’s just pretend that what we see happening is not actually happening and let us wheel out Steven Pinker to massage the stats and tell us how good we have it even though people are under immense economic stress. Hey, if you can afford an iPhone and a decent pair of shoes you are not poor and have no reason to feel out of sorts. Rampant income inequality, stagnating wages, disconnected communities, bah, means nothing. It’s quite ironic how the self-styled masters of objectivity and logic cannot see (or don’t want to see) what is in front of their eyes. Reminds me of the Russiagate hysteria. Denial ain’t only a river Egypt. If you entertain the idea that maybe an oligarchical kleptocracy is not the best system for a stable society, why then you might have to abandon or seriously question a host of other assumptions.

  4. I had a lifelong battle with depression until the advent of SSRIs, so for me they are a godsend. None of the side effects mentioned are as detrimental as the misery of depression itself. I often wonder how my life would have been different had they been available to me in my twenties. I certainly would not have had the handicaps that depression imposed on me, which included two suicide attempts and coping with life by taking mood altering drugs, some of which undoubtedly damaged my physical health and posed legal risks as well. I think part of the increased risk of suicide among young people is related to use and abuse of social media. The comparative lack today of personal privacy and time to oneself is another factor. We are overly, yet sometimes superficially, connected these days, and we may need to back off from continuous engagement.

  5. In the culture in which I was growing up, the word “success” was used much less than it is in the anglo-american culture. Success and pursuit of it were less discussed. As a result, the greed, which is a human universal, developed in ways that are less well-informed, clumsier, more of a product of groping in the dark, …. and, accidentally, more pluralistic, and more idealistic.

    So, what comes to my attention is that your article has an implicit assumption that what success means is sufficiently well-determined, and commonly agreed, as to not merit any clarification… and that the determinants of success are mainly material.

    What that assumption misses is well illustrated by the example of a YouTube talk I listened to a few months ago. An orthodox christian priest talked of the promise of life eternal and the defeat of death as a very central part of his religion, that the members of his congregation to keep firmly in mind. As a religious outsider, I was struck by the overlap of his words with the most outlandish aims of … his ideological and geographical opposites: Californian techno-humanists and megalomaniac one-percenters.

    Between the visions of these two groups, there is a difference that is remarkable in the context of our discussion. Acceptance of failure and suffering for the christian believers are _the means_ by which they are supposed to reach their aim, their version of “success.” What is more, the stronger the will of the faithful for their aims, the easier it becomes for them to accept suffering and failure.

    That may cast a shadow of doubt. May it not lead to horrors of fanaticism, of which the modern age provided plenty of examples?
    Is my example -not a false avenue out of the human predicament?

    Well, I myself have been both pretty idealistic and guarded toward collectives of all kinds… including my own family. I see no reason why others can’t do the same.

Leave a Reply