Words are code for the mind. Change the word, and you change the thought; change the thought, and you change the action that follows.
This was the logic behind the “person-first” language that emerged in the nonprofit world. A disabled person became a person with a disability. A homeless man became a person without shelter. At its best, this reminded us that individuals deserve dignity. At its worst, it twisted language into unwieldy shapes. But even in this early form, the seed was planted: words were not just descriptions, they were instruments of perception.
From there, the seed grew into something else entirely. What began as a courtesy metastasized into a strategy. Illegal alien became undocumented immigrant — later even person without papers. Crime was reframed as a clerical mishap, trespass as missing paperwork. The reality did not change, but the story around it did.
Examples abound:
- Insane became mentally ill, then mentally challenged, then differently abled, then neurodivergent — until autism and psychosis were jumbled together in one soft word.
- Poor became underprivileged, then disadvantaged, then at-risk.
- Prisoner became inmate, then justice-involved individual, then returning citizen.
- Prostitute became sex worker, and in some corners, even entrepreneur.
This is the euphemism treadmill. When one term wears out — when the public begins to hear the fact beneath the phrase — a new one is minted. The old word is declared harsh; the new word is declared humane. Yet within a few years, the cycle repeats, because the reality has not changed. What wears out is not the word but the illusion.
It is not only the left that does this. The right has its own euphemisms: collateral damage for civilian deaths, enhanced interrogation for torture, tax relief to imply all taxation is a burden. But these are largely the tools of politicians — and politicians are expected to spin.
On the left, the machinery runs far deeper. Academia coins the terms. Bureaucracies write them into law and HR manuals. Media repeat them until they sound normal. Corporate legal departments twist definitions to dodge liability. Activist groups pressure-test phrases and pump them into campaigns. This is why the treadmill feels relentless: it is not just spin but a systematic remapping of language by the institutions that set the tone for daily life. Where the right deploys euphemism as a shield, the left deploys it as an ecosystem.
The social cost is collapse of dialogue itself. What one man calls a crime, another calls “justice involvement.” What one woman calls a killing, another calls “health care.” The disagreement is not over facts but over vocabulary. This is argumentative collapse — debates built on different assumptions, where no amount of logic can bridge the gap. Logic can be disproven like mathematics; beliefs built on euphemism cannot.
The human cost is silence. Teachers, workers, and neighbors police their own speech, never sure which words are safe. Conversations shrink to trivia. Honest questions go unasked. Truth-tellers become pariahs while liars are rewarded for their fluency in code. Even news reporting is hostage: announcers refuse to describe a suspect as “black” for fear of censure, yet have no trouble describing him as “white” when it fits the narrative, as with the Manhattan shooter on July 28, 2025. When words can no longer be trusted to tell us what our eyes can see, reality itself is obscured.
Writers saw this danger long ago. Orwell’s “1984” gave us Newspeak: vocabulary narrowed until rebellion became unthinkable. Bradbury’s “Fahrenheit 451” showed firemen not only burning books but flattening language into slogans and jingles. These stand as the genetic core of the trope: Orwell warned our words might be stolen, Bradbury that they might be drowned in noise. Later works carried the torch — Delany’s “Babel-17,” Vance’s “The Languages of Pao,” Atwood’s “The Handmaid’s Tale,” Miéville’s “Embassytown” — all meditations on how controlling language means controlling thought.
How do we fight back? The answer is not complicated.
- Speak plainly. Precision is not cruelty; it is clarity.
- Refuse the treadmill. When new terms appear, ask what truth the old ones revealed.
- Expose the trick. Call out language-laundering when you see it.
- Reclaim the commons. Words belong to everyone; using them truthfully restores the shared inheritance.
- Teach the young. Children must know that words mean things. To pass down plain speech is to pass down freedom.
Orwell warned us that words could be stolen. Bradbury warned us that words could be flattened. These were warnings, not instructions. Yet here we are.
The way out is not through committees or commissions. It is through courage — the courage to speak plainly and truthfully. Call things what they are. Refuse the treadmill. Teach your children that clarity is not cruelty, that truth is not hate, that words are tools for the free, not toys for the powerful.
The fight for language is the fight for reality itself. If we lose our words, we lose our world.
The left’s euphemism treadmill isn’t about kindness — it’s about control. Change the words, change the thought, change the world. Orwell and Bradbury warned us; now it’s here. If we lose our words, we lose our world.
That’s why PJ Media tells the truth plainly — no spin, no euphemisms, no treadmill. Join us today and get 60% off with the promo code FIGHT.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member