Democrats Advised to Drop Certain Terminology

Recently, a left-leaning think tank called The Third Way released guidance urging Democrats to reconsider their language. On Thursday, they emphasized the importance of avoiding “words and phrases that ordinary people don’t commonly use.” This advice comes amid ongoing conversations about the political climate and messaging strategy.

The memo outlines a blacklist of terms that fall into six main categories:

• Therapeutic language
• Seminar jargon
• Expert jargon
• Gender and orientation language
• Language around racial dynamics
• Terminology concerning crime

The question arises: why aren’t these terms collectively branded as “Orwellian nonsense”?

Here’s a bit of insight into some of the terms on the list and what they might actually mean:

• People who were imprisoned [criminals]
• Justice was involved [criminal interference]
• Dialogue [discussion]
• Trigger [a wake-up call]
• Small attack [criticizing someone overly sensitive]
• Body shame [making fun of weight]
• Covered norms [acting like a Democrat]
• System of suppression [disdain for merit]
• Cultural appropriation [trying new foods while watching movies]
• Unused [homeless individuals]
• Food insecurity [running out of money for groceries]
• Housing anxiety [worrying about becoming homeless]
• Those who have moved [immigrants]
• Birth person [woman]
• Pregnant people [expecting mothers]
• Cisgender [straight individuals]
• Denaming [referring to someone by their past name]
• Heteronormic acid [an obscure term]
• BIPOC [people of color]
• LGBTQIA+ [the LGBTQ community]
• Unwilling confinement [imprisonment]

This situation highlights two key points…

For one, it reveals an internal acknowledgment among Democrats that they may be losing the cultural narrative. I mean, it raises the question of how to position themselves effectively.

But the real intrigue lies in what alternatives they might use…

If “birth person” or “pregnant” are off the table, what comes next? What words will they use if they avoid saying “incarcerated people” or opting for “involved in justice”?

Do they create another obscure term or just speak plainly, risking alienating some of their more vocal supporters?

Secondly, since the Obama era, there’s been a noticeable shift where identity politics has stirred a more radical base. Today, it feels as if those extreme voices dictate terms of engagement, enforcing adherence to approved language. Deviating from this script can lead to ostracism.

Democrats have found themselves in a tricky spot, as attempts to temper this rhetoric often backfire.

It’s interesting to note that “undocumented immigrants” didn’t make it onto the blacklist.

Why not? Because that term seems more entrenched in their discourse.

If The Third Way truly intends to distance itself from confusing terminology, they’ll likely face backlash and perhaps even their own set of restrictions.

You’ll notice a lack of moral courage in proposing alternative language. It seems they’re caught in a conundrum.

Watching this unfold is bound to be more compelling than much of what’s on television these days.