There is something refreshingly raw about a figure like Spencer Pratt, the infamous “villain” from The Hills, stepping into the political arena. Yes, I admit it: I have always been drawn to the villain in the story— the one who everyone else seems to hate. And right now, as Pratt campaigns for Mayor of Los Angeles in the 2026 race, that glossing over him is driving me absolutely insane.

Pratt, who announced his bid on the one-year anniversary of the devastating Palisades Fire that claimed his own home, is not running a conventional campaign. He is on a mission to expose what he calls deep-seated fraud, mismanagement, and dysfunction in California. He talks boldly about cleaning up the streets, tackling homelessness (those “zombies”— as he calls them— wandering the city in a drug-fueled haze), and holding the powers-that-be accountable. It is the kind of outsider energy that resonates in a city plagued by visible decay. Yet the media and political insiders treat him like a punchline rather than a serious contender polling in the twenties and surging with real voter frustration. There should be a lesson in that.

Here is the core lesson I have learned from observing politics at every level, and this is not a partisan jab—it is a structural truth that transcends red, blue, or whatever color-coded tribe you belong to: If you truly want meaningful change, you have to drive it locally. Primarily, start with yourself. National spectacles and global posturing grab headlines, but the day-to-day realities that crush or elevate ordinary lives—trash on the sidewalks, skyrocketing rents, failing schools, unchecked crime—are decided in city halls, county offices, and state capitals. The so-called “global elite,” do not lose sleep over the average taxpayer scraping by. They are insulated by distance, wealth, and influence. Real accountability starts at the street level.

Yes, Pratt promises to shine a light on the waste, the fraud, and the entrenched interests that have turned parts of LA into an open-air disaster zone. But let us be brutally honest: do we really believe the system will simply let him? The mayor’s office sits beneath the governor’s shadow in the hierarchy of power. Look at the Zohran guy who won the mayoral election in NYC. never mind that I personally do not support his policies, I am pretty sure that he was never allowed to install his vision. It is because the governor makes the policies. And governors, like California’s Gavin Newsom, are in the business of creating jobs and opportunities—or at least the appearance of them. Here is where the cynical machinery reveals itself:

Imagine a city where homelessness and open drug use are largely erased. No more tent encampments. No more “zombies” shuffling through downtown or Venice Beach. On the surface, that sounds like victory. But zoom out: entire industries, nonprofits, task forces, union contracts, consulting gigs, and government programs depend on the existence of these problems. Cleanup crews, social workers, outreach teams, mental health contractors, housing initiative funders—the list goes on. If the problem vanishes, so does the justification for the budgets, the grants, and the jobs that flow from it.

This is not conspiracy; it is economics 101. Problems that fester generate employment. Politicians can campaign on “solutions” year after year, securing votes from those dependent on the system while reassuring the frustrated public that help is always just one more program, one more tax increase, one more initiative away. “We’re working on it,” they say, as the tents multiply and the needles pile up. Clean it all up too effectively, and suddenly there is a surplus of idle bureaucrats and contractors wondering where their next paycheck comes from. Better to manage the crisis than solve it outright.

That is the quiet cynicism at the heart of so much local governance. The people are left in a dependent loop, turning to “daddy government” for salvation while the same officials who presided over the decline promise yet another fresh start. Meanwhile, the average Angeleno deals with the fallout: unsafe streets, businesses fleeing, quality of life evaporating. Pratt’s outsider status—reality TV fame, no long political résumé—might be exactly what makes him threatening to this ecosystem. He does not owe favors to the same players as the regular politicians. He lost his home to what he sees as failed leadership. That personal stake could fuel genuine disruption, or it could highlight just how immovable the bureaucratic blob really is. We will see how this all plays out…

I am not endorsing every plank of Pratt’s platform, nor am I blind to the spectacle of a Hills villain turned mayoral hopeful. But the visceral reaction against him from certain corners says more about the defenders of the status quo than about Pratt himself. In an era where frustration with visible failure is boiling over, his surge in the polls (recent numbers putting him in striking distance) reflects an electorate tired of the same scripted failures. But I remain skeptical whether his lofty vision is plausible.

I know that is not how the political game is played. Local politics matters because it is where we see the proof in action. If we keep waiting for distant saviors or global resets, we will stay stuck in this cycle of decline. Whether Pratt can actually break it remains to be seen on June 2 and beyond. But ignoring the messenger because of his reality TV past, while the city continues its slide, would be the real insanity. Change starts local. The question is whether we will let the problems keep paying the salaries, or finally demand they end.