I absolutely adore Go, finding it to be an imperfect language that nonetheless yields powerful, maintainable solutions. It is the ultimate duct-tape language, allowing one to build robust, performant systems using a massive library and fantastic C interop where necessary. Yet I wouldn't consider it for "low-level" code. Garbage collection alone invalidates it in that regards (religious war: reference counting beats GC every time), in the same way that C# and Java aren't credible low level languages.

You aren't going to see C# or Go used in the Linux kernel.

"Rust (the Rick & Morty of programming languages - not a compliment)"

You mean something that is good to great but that "outsiders" or late adopters feel unexplainably threatened by and thus feel the need to attack it and its admirers? Where ironically the detractors are louder and more numerous than the advocates ever were?

Rust is particularly susceptible to this effect as it has been racking up wins and growing in influence, making people feel insecure about their current skillset/knowledge (always a weird motivator for rhetoric in this industry).

I have only dabbled in Rust a few times. It feels very unintuitive and "write-only" from my 1000 foot, ignorant perspective. But I realize that's on me, and appreciate the focus and purpose of the language.

Rust today seems like a 2013 Tesla Model S. A couple of years ago it was the GM EV1: It used to be largely promise of a future to come with a loads of downsides, where today it's expensive to get started with, has a lot of incompatibilities, but it's superior to most alternatives. Tomorrow it and those like it will be the norm.