Something that I’ve found very difficult over the past week is to keep my opinions to myself. In general, I tend to lean towards practices that are associated with liberal ideology. In a time where it feels like so much of the world is backsliding, it’s hard to not want to just get out there and say things. In fact, it almost feels too obligatory at times, and it sometimes feels like it comes at the expense of social reputation. In general, I am blocked by a few people on Bluesky whenever I post something positive about transgender ideology. Among the causes I believe in, it’s an important one to stand up for.
It becomes difficult to notice how I perceive myself compared to the general public because sometimes I fear that I come across as a contrarian or that my opinions aren’t always the most thought-out. I worry that me saying that I never wanted to be an activist is some pathetic excuse as to why I’m not more outspoken. It’s something that I’ve struggled with my entire life, in part because there are more charismatic messengers. The best I can do is support the people with the attractive platform, who actually have the microphone plugged into the correct speaker.
But I think that I may have snapped a bit at recent news regarding Gavin Newsom. I think it’s acceptable for residents of any state to have opinions on their leaders. In general, Newsom doesn’t do himself any favors by putting himself out there as the liberal hero that America needs. At times, I think he’s done fantastic work. He has charisma. The issue is that in the past six months especially, I’ve come to question a few things.
It's not so much that I feel he’s mistreating members of the LGBTQIA+ community by using anti-trans rhetoric and mostly promoting right-wing conspiracists on his podcast. He’s using the act of “branching out” to exclude in different ways. He’s very much speaking to an audience whom he seems to want to please instead of working in contrast to. For as much as California can be written off as a liberal mecca, even despite tilting results from the 2024 election, it does feel that it’s a state at risk from the same levels of kowtowing to a president who prefers bullying to answers, where he can surely tell you what the problem is, but will never solve things. Did he ever help those dogs being eaten? No. It was all a racist ploy, and one whose ephemeral use in the zeitgeist came at the expense of a small community being harassed for no reason.
To get into the heart of what I feel is both my sincerest area of this essay and also what I have come to accept is disagreeable to many, the thing that made me snap goes against my ideals to the point that I immediately hoped that they would bite Newsom in the ass. I feared that it would make me look conservative to say what I disagreed with, but it was more the fact that our governor has not only kowtowed to pathetic name-calling, but done so with the approval of people like Pod Save America calling this move genius. Given their history of political campaigns, I really did expect better from them.
It all started with the Texas redistricting. In short, I am against redistricting. I consider it a way of cheating and that it makes politicians ultimately lazier. My belief is that you must give people a reason to vote for you. If you do that, then there’s no need to redraw lines and make things go your way. I find what Texas is doing disgusting, and I commend the Democrats who fled the state out of protest because it brought to light how unfair everything is. To me, the pressure to ostracize the nation by having certain groups be the dominant power is a sign of how much we’ve lost the plot.
Newsom is essentially banking on this redistricting plan… and I hope he FAILS. There is a nature that makes me want to support the liberal party and see them push things back towards reason. However, this redistricting plan, as it relates to California and its upcoming emergency election, is stupid. It’s petty and mostly designed as a fear tactic that is supposed to convince Texas to reconsider. I’m not entirely sure how redistricting a state known for its blueness is going to change things, but he sure does. This makes me think he leaned back in his office chair and, through a smug smile, said, "Mission accomplished."
I guess on some level he has because almost everyone I have seen has been favorable to this reaction. I saw people on Bluesky suggest that this was a “good day” because the redistricting plans are starting to be finalized. To me, it feels like a waste of time. It’s up there with recent secessionist lobbying that happened around the San Diego area which I’ve always been opposed to, because for as good as California could be as an independent nation (hypothetically), this would remove so much of the other pride I have about the area around it. I love America and want to see it thrive. By seceding, you’re basically giving up on things getting better. You’re also giving up your right to benefit from those contributions freely. I also hate the idea of being petty and raising export prices to other states just to send a message, but that’s been more of an idea people have proposed to me outside of any news story.
If it hasn’t been clear, I hate the idea of redistricting. I want it to fail because it sends a foolish message. Why is it wrong when “the bad guy” does it, but okay when you do it? Why must we move things around when simply trying to elect better officials would be much easier? Why must we cheat our way into sending a message? I get that the liberal response has been weak, but I still don’t think flicking your nose is the bad-ass move you think it is. This is especially a problem when you consider that there are more pressing matters to handle in California than where the invisible lines are. Why are we distracting ourselves with playground taunting?
With all this said, the tipping point came after that news broke. In an effort to capture the zeitgeist, Newsom’s staff has started a social media account designed to imitate the aggressive, all-caps way that our president talks. It’s supposedly designed in a way to emphasize the self-righteousness of Newsom’s platform and that he’s actually caring for the people. Mind you, I didn’t elect him to be a satirist or even write jokes. In theory, I didn’t even elect him the first time because his spam phone calls pissed me off so much. I mostly stood up for him in the recall election because back then, I felt like we recognized that wasting these resources was STUPID. Look what it’s led to. Maybe it’s better than having Larry Elder as governor, but I also wanted to believe we didn’t have a governor and “serious” presidential candidate who was getting his jollies from being a whiny troll. Where’s the diplomacy? Where’s the dignity?
Don’t give me that shit about needing to get in the mud to wrestle a pig. It’s just another way to admit that nobody wants to try and find solutions that will make them look good in the history books, where they won’t come across as the WWE wrestlers that our president based his persona on. He is a master of persuasion, and someone who knows how to feed off of hate better than a rational man ever word. I still think Newsom has more of a “practical” eye in this situation, but the idea that we’re giving him attention and celebrating his use of playground taunts is another nail in the coffin of whether I think we should vote for him in future circumstances.
This isn’t pathetic so much as exhausting. I have been suffering from a mix of burnout and depression as everything has happened. While they’re both functional and fluctuate based on where my mind is, something is annoying about realizing that this year marks the 10th anniversary of when his campaign started, when the conversation began to shift towards where we are today. I miss those days when we assumed he wasn’t serious, when the big Republican debate was with Ted Cruz over whose wife was a bigger whore. It was dumb and, in my mind, something no rational candidate would say. We think of Gary Hart as having a downfall over a simple affair, but everything since 2015 has made me question more and more the fabric of reality and whether diplomacy was real or just a concept. The malleability by which it has changed just since January has bothered me so much, and I hate that I’m likely to spend the rest of my life watching the next generation try to put things back together.
But the reason I say this is because in 2016, there was a concept that came up often. It wasn’t specific to politics, but very much ballooned in a year when everyone was fighting inside their proverbial “bubble.” There were constant stories about how, because of one online comment, a liberal “owned” a conservative, or a conservative “owned” a liberal. I won’t act like some of those taunts were cathartic, and you wanted to believe it put everything into context.
However, the thing that became abundantly clear was that no matter who was “owned,” there was no resolution. Being “owned” was a perception, and something that many moved on from immediately. It was a bull in a china shop scenario ad nauseam. Everyone was “owning” everybody else to the point that civil discourse and my belief that we should be moving towards compromise were fading. Gone was the civility of a debate. Gone was the state of the unions where Joe Biden didn’t act like he was doing comedy crowd work against a dissenting branch. Everyone was “owning” each other, but never in a way that proved to last.
He still became president. He still had a criminal record. He still said a lot of heinous comments. Nothing really “owned” him, and in fact, people loved him because they found his brashness as a way of “owning” everybody else. Who am I to argue with a guy who defined his life as a TV personality? He knows how to sway better than the lot of us… and I hate him for it, especially because of how disingenuous his messaging may come across.
If anyone was “owned,” the past decade never would’ve gone the way that it did. My belief that nobility would’ve pulled through would’ve happened, and maybe the nation would have a more positive disposition now. The negativity would fade, and the hostility would fade to a minor faction of modern discourse. Instead, it’s the norm. Institutions defined by facts and sharing information are all but crumbling under the new economy. Slavery is no longer being pushed as “very bad.” History isn’t what it says it was, depending on who you ask.
So, forgive me for seeing Newsom doing these sarcastic parodies and thinking that he’s lost a lot of respect from me. Had this been your run-of-the-mill comedian, I might be more forgiving. I still would roll my eyes because of how disinterested I’ve become with snarky responses to larger events. The idea that we’re just stuck in a feedback cycle of mocking the dumb thing without finding a solution is upsetting. At most, there are often Band-Aids that cover somewhat of the wound. I guess if Newsom is fulfilling any role here, it’s laughing to keep from crying.
But still… I think that this made me ballistic because of how futile and recognizable it is. Newsom isn’t being some iconoclast here. What he’s doing is no different than what lesser-paid teenagers were doing in 2015. They were validating the idea of immediate reaction over depth and meaning. It may point out the structural flaws of how we communicate, but it’s also not saying anything worthwhile. Remember how Tim Walz called Republicans “weird”? That was a short-lived phenomenon. These taunts do sting and allow for some fun reactions, but you’re ultimately setting up the opposition to attack you with a more potent potable.
Which is the thing… the quest for symmetry in pettiness can only go so far until it swallows your dignity whole. Conservatives have proven that they’ll go to shallower alternatives just to hold power. Do you want to be shallow as well? Do you want someone who has been relentless for a decade now to wear you down until you realize he can’t be knocked over? A counterstrike will eventually emerge, and then this “owning” will no longer seem cute. It will be a bunch of bullshit that he posted online to make people smile. At that point, I ask… why are you even governor?
If you have an issue with internet addiction, please go to rehab. Recognize that there’s a world outside of social media that needs to be taken care of. I recognize that it’s tempting to imitate what’s popular, but helping people is ultimately the better option. Don’t just spend your life on the most ephemeral device known to man, wasting gigabytes with clever jokes. Make change. Don’t dissociate on empty goodwill brought on by likes and retweets. Notice what your constituents want and give it to them. Don’t redistrict just because it can send a message. Much like how I think that expanding the Supreme Court can ultimately backfire with enough time, so will this idea. I’m worried that a lot of people will go for it because it “owns” some proverbial force. I promise you… it won’t. Not when serious matters could be taking up our time instead.
I love California. I’ve called it home most of my life. However, this is one moment where things became too bothersome for me to be quiet. Newsom being a governor is one thing. Expecting him to be a showman when we have a whole city full of more talented writers is way past pathetic. Leave the humor to the professionals. Give us something that will matter when your account becomes irrelevant and you’ve moved on to the next stage of life. Do something besides whine. Millions have come before you, and guess what, it’s been a decade of people whining. Nothing has been solved. Wear your smug smile if you want, but I still wish you’d uncross your arms and look at what’s in front of you. It’s California. We have a lot more important things to worry about at this exact moment. Please, and thank you.
Comments
Post a Comment