I don’t have a lot of good things to say about the left, but one thing is for sure: they’re very good at marketing and manipulating the public with language. It’s a strategy that has been used for many years, fine-tuned and perfected, with one goal in mind: to make their agenda sound inevitable, reasonable, even virtuous.
Think about how carefully the left has curated its terms.
Abortion isn't the ending of a human life. No. They refer to it as “choice” and "reproductive freedom,” as if the ability to end a human life is no different than choosing not to procreate at all. The language strips out the moral weight and replaces it with something that sounds clean and personal, like picking a paint color.
The left’s term for transgender procedures is another example of how language is used to shape perception.
Think about the phrase “gender-affirming care.” It frames these procedures as compassionate, necessary medical treatment rather than something controversial, experimental, and frankly barbaric. Calling it “affirming” suggests the procedure corrects something wrong. By calling it “care,” the implication is that it’s inherently beneficial. That framing does a lot of heavy lifting — it nudges people to accept the premise before they’ve even had a chance to question it.
Recommended: Greg Gutfeld’s Eulogy of Swalwell’s Political Career Was Brutal and Epic
Then there's immigration. People who crossed into this country illegally, in violation of federal law, aren't lawbreakers in the left's telling. They're "undocumented immigrants." Like they just forgot to file some paperwork. The word "illegal" carries consequences and accountability. "Undocumented" carries neither. That's not an accident. That's a communications strategy.
I avoid using all of these terms when I write about these issues. But there’s another euphemism that the left has adopted that I avoid but many on the right use regularly: "progressive."
You may have noticed I avoid the word in my writing as much as possible. When I do use it, I do so reluctantly, usually when quoting someone. I think using the word to describe the left is a gift to them, and conservatives shouldn’t give it to them willingly.
Here's why it matters. Merriam-Webster defines progressive as "of, relating to, or characterized by progress." Dictionary.com says it means "making progress toward better conditions." Progress, by its very definition, is good. It implies forward movement. Improvement. Advancement. Who could be against progress?
That's exactly the point.
When you call left-wing policies "progressive," you're not just using a label. You're subliminally conceding the entire argument before it starts. You're telling your audience that the left's agenda represents movement in a positive direction, that their ideas are the future, and opposition to them is, by implication, backward. Regressive. Stuck in the past.
It's a rhetorical trap, and conservatives walk into it constantly. Nothing about left-wing policies can be equated to progress.
I'm not suggesting we play the same game and start inventing flattering labels for the right. Conservatives don't need a rebrand. We need to stop doing the opposition's marketing for them. Calling the radical left flank of the Democratic Party the "progressive wing" frames their extremism as idealism. It doesn't describe them — it endorses them.
So I use "left," "leftist," "far-left," or just "Democrats.”
It's more accurate, less loaded in their favor, and it doesn't smuggle in a compliment. Words shape how people think. The left has known this for decades. It's about time the rest of us caught up.
