Euphemistic labeling and relative comparisons sanitized silicosis hazards

Evidence

Silica dust does not lend itself to justification in terms of personal and large-scale societal benefits. However, it is subject to the usual sanitizing language and mitigating comparisons; for example, silica dust becomes “nuisance dust.” At a national conference, other industrial hazards were used to downplay the seriousness of silicosis: “From a statistical point of view, therefore, the problem of silicosis is not as serious or general as some other industrial problems, such as lead poisoning or industrial accidents” (U.S. Department of Labor, 1937). — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 1795

Categorization

• XREF: Directly instantiates Bandura’s euphemistic-labeling mechanism that underpins the moral disengagement the reader correlates with authoritarian rationalization claims. — connects to: Euphemistic names let dispersants double as biocides compounding harm — Rob Nixon, Slow Violence and the Environmentalism…, 830; Euphemistic labeling whitewashes the harm of secondhand smoke
• DEFINE: ‘Nuisance dust’ is a textbook example of euphemistic labeling neutralizing perceived harm.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm…, 1795