For better or worse, when pop stars talk, people tend to listen. So when singer Chappell Roan recently declined to endorse Democratic candidate Kamala Harris in this year’s presidential election, the news spread quickly – and a backlash soon followed.
Roan’s reluctance to back Harris is born of perceived “problems on both sides” of American politics that give her pause, she says. She added, during the interview with The Guardian that started this all, that “there are so many things that I would want to change, so I don’t feel pressured to endorse someone.”
It’s not the first time she’s had less-than-glowing remarks to offer about members of the Democratic party. In June, she revealed that she turned down President Joe Biden’s invitation to perform at the White House. “We want liberty, justice and freedom for all,” she said at the time, citing concerns around transgender Americans’ eroding rights, and American funding of Israeli military operations, as some of her specific pain points. “When you do that, that’s when I’ll come.”
In response to Roan’s reluctance to endorse, Harris supporters took to social media to call her names, to call her a covert Republican, to call her plain stupid. The outcry lasted long enough, and was consistent enough in nature, that Roan then took to TikTok this week to clarify some points. No, she will not be voting for Republican candidate and former President Donald Trump on Election Day – she will, indeed, cast her ballot for Harris.
But she won’t be stumping for her anytime soon, Roan added – she still has too many concerns, and she’s “not settling for what has been offered.” Roan clarified that “I think it’s important for me to question authority, and question world leaders, and question myself.”
Is this not her right? Not just her right – her responsibility as a concerned citizen? Is this truly behavior and thought and engagement with electoral politics that we wish to discourage, especially in younger generations? Do we really think the best course of action to guide us to a better day … is to tell young women with strong opinions to shut up? To belittle their intelligence, simply because their points and perspectives challenge our own?
Perhaps such dissent and complaints will be better received from an older person. So let me say, as someone 15 years Roan’s senior, that I am not entirely pleased with Harris either, or with the Democratic Party. For example, I’ve no love for the hawkish linguistic notes making their way into her campaign speeches – no, I actually don’t want the “strongest, most lethal fighting force in the world,” and I am, frankly, dismayed at desire for such a thing. And, I am distressed by the broader party’s shift away from platform items such as, say, abolition of the death penalty – an anger I feel especially keenly this week, in the wake of the unjust death of Marcellus Williams.
Or, will you just tell me to shut up, too?
Look. I, like Roan, understand that the alternative to Harris is the man who appointed most of the judges that let Williams die, despite mounting evidence of innocence – the same judges that gleefully ushered the fall of Roe v. Wade. A man who offers protection to women while hiding from viable accusations of (and court settlements confirming) sexual harassment and assault. A man who would bring about changes to the laws of the land that would erode our rights and alter the very fabric of our democracy.
But one of the main reasons he’s been buoyed to the levels of prominence and power that he now enjoys is that he leads a group of zealots – each one happy to follow him, Pied-Piper style, off a cliff, inevitably dragging us along for the plummet. They refuse to refute him – or if they once did, they take it back as soon as it’s personally or politically advantageous to do so. A fear response from his base to the prospect of a tomorrow that doesn’t center them.
This ethos cannot win – in any sense. One should vote, and one should do so guided by their moral compass, with eyes trained on horizons beyond their own. But our ballots should be cast with the expectation that the recipients of our votes will be ready to do some serious listening.
After all, speaking up is how we have Harris as a candidate at all. Remember that after Biden’s disastrous debate performance in June, a groundswell quickly emerged calling for his ouster as the Democratic candidate. And in those first days, an equal and opposite reaction sprouted up to shut down those who wanted Biden replaced – a fear response of its own, to the prospect of another Trump term.
But then, the shift was made to Harris in July, and a sense of hope reverberated throughout the political left. The joy was tangible – and that joy was fought for.
Because to argue, to protest, to shout what you believe, is to fight for what you love, for who you love, and for what you believe in. (Even if, for those backing a cheat and abuser for POTUS, what they love and believe in is themselves, and an imagined past.) And most times, one fights with the intent to win – it’s an expression of hope, really, to fight. Hope that a voice might be heard, a heart might be turned. That the person before the fighter will see the damn light.
Fear is a tool used by the Trumps of the world to squash opposition for personal gain. It cannot become progressives’ raison d’être to do the same, even if the motivations are more altruistic – and certainly not at the expense of women’s voices. ◼️
.jpg){kind=link}