In the context of the video, absolutely. But I'd extend the Epicurean answer to: Myself – and if can we can be friends, then you too, à la the so-called “Gestalt Prayer”:
I fully agree as you say, and as Maté lays out in his little speech, we have a very deep need for attachments, so…
“Who would you rather have in your life? Them or yourself?”
“Myself!”
…is not at all about rejecting the company of others, rather it is about being oneself, such that one can be seen for who one is, and with that have the basis for form genuine connection, which in my view is the antidote to existential dread. (I'd add that one shouldn't be needlessly disagreeable in character, which just causes avoidable pain – one might argue that is what Socrates, Plato, Diogenes and the Ancient Stoics did (if Modern Stoics would do that, they would elevate virtue above the law, and get themselves into trouble just like their ancient heroes).)
I found it interesting how he described what boils down to Stoic mentality in his negative example of parenting ([]-comment added by me):
“I'm going to threaten you with the loss of the most important thing to you, which is the attachment relationship [and that feels very dangerous to you, because you're a helpless child in need of attachment to adults like me]. If you feel your feelings, you're going to be disattached. When you no longer feel your feelings, you can come back and talk to me.”
So this type of parenting is basically a Stoic boot camp for children, which I didn't see this clearly before. (I'd like to add: Raising children such that they are allowed to express their emotions, have them acknowledged, and get support in learning to regulate them (called co-regulation) does not at all imply raising children without any sense of responsibility or self-efficacy.) If we take what Maté says (which I consider to be true), we can conclude that if the Stoics were to take Epictetus by his word
“For good or for ill, life and nature are governed by laws that we can't change. The quicker we accept this, the more tranquil we can be.”
and really “live according to nature” they would need to accept that feelings, too, are a part of our nature, and therefore they would have to arrive at the true philosophy and be Epicurean…
(At times like this, it still feels wild how I myself have been blind to this simple truth for so long; how that was even possible despite all the reading and reflection, despite knowing in my gut that “something isn't right”; how completely I was entrenched in what is wrong so obviously.)