That seems a wee bit excessive to me.
[UPDATE, since this has gotten a zillion replies and a zillion downvotes]: The point I was intending to make was not that Watts's response was inappropriate under the circumstances (though I think that is also the case), but rather that "Charlie Watts method for handling interpersonal conflict on a high-performing team of specialists" is not one that ought to be held up as an example to be generally emulated.
You should grab Jagger by the shirt collar and threaten him, so that you can punch Richards and have somewhere to escalate as need be.
Can you stand up? I do believe it's working, good That'll keep you going through the show Come on, it's time to go
Probably just tip him over with a slight push of your palm.
What one finds excessive is, of course, cultural. The pages ended remembering the tribe of two millennia ago who killed the last warrior to show at the assembly, or the use of George Washington to hang farm-boy deserters forty feet high as an example.
Which book/essay are you referring to?
Text accessible e.g. at fs.blog/great-talks/psychology-human-misjudgment/
> However
He is having fun trying to transmit wisdom of his to the interested. That is the scope.
Given Shaka Zulu, you don't have to go back that far.
It was a very different, more flamboyant and volatile, era.
Recently watched "Gimme Shelter" a documentary about the free concert at Altamont in 1970 that ended with someone in the Hells Angels (which had been hired for security!) stabbing a concert-goer to death. This film, according to some, documents "the end of the 60's" and marked the beginning of a much meaner era. (https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidchiu/2019/12/03/altamont-a...).
"Gimme Shelter" (the film) captures the band personalities in a really preceptive way. Watts is pensive and brooding, Jagger is mercurial and far-removed from Earthy reality.