This is a guest post by John David Seel.
Pronouns matter significantly in today's world, often causing distress when misused. This issue is particularly sensitive within the trans community, where incorrect pronouns are seen as verbal violence. Jordan Peterson's career gained momentum from his refusal to adhere to university-mandated pronoun guidelines. Anyone under sixty knows pronouns are a hot topic.
Recently, the pronoun "they" was politically weaponized. At the Republican National Convention, the phrase "They tried to assassinate Donald Trump" was frequently used. In reality, it was a "he," not "they." The use of "they" aimed to implicate Democrats and link the assassination attempt to various perceived attacks on Trump. There is no evidence to support this, but it fuels the victimhood and resentment driving much of the Republican base. If pressed, the speaker might claim the "they" is meant to be ambiguous, allowing it to refer to immigrants, the deep state, Secret Service, the Democratic National Committee, and more. This vagueness is intentional, fostering conspiracy theories while maintaining plausible deniability. This is the opposite of promoting national unity and moderating political rhetoric. "They" is a fighting word, inflammatory and dangerous in today's volatile political climate.
Yet, the circumstances surrounding the assassination attempt and the lack of transparency following it make "they" more plausible, though still unsubstantiated. How could such security incompetence occur by a respected institution without raising suspicions of intentionality by some "they"? The silence, finger-pointing, and lack of accountability give weight to the term. "They" is intentionally triggering and... increasingly plausible.
"They" fits our society, where words lose meaning, gender is detached from biology, and reality becomes virtual. "They" represents living in a world of conspiracy theories and plausible deniability. In this world, truth is not expected, making lying impossible. "They" asks us to believe the unbelievable—"the pitch of the roof made it unsafe"—at least until the next news cycle.
"They" signifies cultural nihilism and societal decline. Sociologist James Davison Hunter described this as "dissolution." He writes, "The modern world questions or negates the trust connecting human discourse and the 'reality' of the world... When the shared meaning of words is undermined, when we no longer trust that words signify what we thought, any meaning can be imputed to words. If words can mean anything, they have no intimate meaning or possibility of a common meaning." "'They' shot President Trump" is just such a phrase, revealing more about our society than we might initially think, and what it suggests is troubling.
John Seel holds a PhD in American Studies from the University of Maryland and M.Div from Covenant Theological Seminary. He is an Anglican cultural renewal entrepreneur and social impact consultant.
I think the piece is more nuanced than some read it as. As Seel wrote, ""They" is intentionally triggering and... increasingly plausible."
I wrote a song way back called. Who are “they ?” Mostly about paranoia and victimhood. As I recall English classes, they is supposed to be used once you’ve established the noun of who they are.
Yes, I do think the use was intentionally left and ambiguous so that you could fill in the blank depending on which possible group you think may want to off Trump. I think most of us know it is a range of people even some Republicans. (Not that they would do it but they join a chorus of demonizing Trump. Heck, his VP once did!
To me it’s not Democrats per se, but again a broad swath ranging from the administrative state to the techno – intelligence complex, academic eggheads and we might as well thrown in the big gov media. I think most Trump supporters know the faction as a whole and many know, though Trump is far from a Messiah, it is spiritual warfare. The “they” are the proponents of chaos and unbridled sin. In other words, the Godless.