Spain's viral list of buzzwords that signal empty thinking

The dictionary of nonsense: words that betray empty thought

In mid-2023, a thread on a current affairs forum proposed an exercise as simple as it was devastating: list the words that, uttered without self-criticism, betray a mind trapped in clichés and slogans. The list, which exceeded one hundred contributions, became a thermometer of social fatigue with trendy language.

The debate wasn't original—criticism of political and corporate jargon is as old as rhetoric—but it did have the virtue of gathering in one place the terms that provoke immediate rejection among wide sectors. It did so with a systematicity worth analyzing.

From 'sustainable' to 'empowerment': the great classics

What remained clear is that the vocabulary of the so-called pogre agenda raises the most blisters. Words like "sustainable," "resilience," "sorority," "cisgender," or "micro-machismo" appeared again and again. Not just for their abusive use, but because, according to participants, their employment often comes with a lack of intellectual depth: those who drop them don't debate, they recite. One user summarized it ironically: "Resilience automatically turns the spitter into a profound zascandil." The harshness of the expression is exaggerated, but reflects a real perception of saturation.

There was also room for business jargon and empty filler phrases. "Roadmap," "as it could not be otherwise," or "we bet on" entered the list for their capacity to replace ideas with verbal bureaucracy. And, of course, the omnipresent "bro" among people over 40, which deserved special mention for how pathetic it sounds.

Politics as a factory of Newspeak

Democracy itself didn't escape: some considered that pronouncing "democracy" or "justice" without any hint of criticism is a sign of having bought the official narrative without paying the toll. The discussion devolved into accusations about who indoctrinates minors, with racial undertones that diverted from the original focus. An exchange between two users ended in insults and phonetic parodies, demonstrating that the line between language criticism and hate is thin.

But the core remained: there is a catalog of terms that, for a significant part of the population, function as detectors of herd thinking. From "gender" to "heteropatriarchy," passing through "emotional salary" or "eco-resilience," the repertoire grows every year.

What does this list reveal about society?

Apart from the verbal excesses, the exercise has sociological value: it shows the weariness of those who feel public debate has been filled with slogans that close thought instead of opening it. The obsession with labeling everything—"fascist," "right-wing bigot," "macho"—as a way to disqualify without arguing generates a counter-effect: any new word is received with automatic hostility.

The question left hanging is whether language is a symptom or cause of intellectual polarization. The thread doesn't resolve it, but at least it put in black and white a shared feeling: the sense that the more inclusivity is talked about, the less the other is listened to.