Euphemistic language actively increases people’s willingness to do harm

Evidence

Linguistic camouflaging of the detrimental effects of social policies and practices is a flourishing morally neutralizing strategy (Bolinger, 1980; Lakoff, 2002; Lutz, 1987; Rothwell, 1982). Sanitizing language is not just a word game, however. It shapes people’s perception of reality and increases their willingness to engage in detrimental activities (Bandura, 1999). — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement, 2694

Categorization

• XREF: Directly corroborates the vault’s claims about ordinary people rationally supporting harmful Islamophobic/racist policy via language framing — the mechanism by which labels neutralize moral alarm. — connects to: Euphemistic language like ‘collateral damage’ severs accountability for harm — Robin Wall Kimmerer, Braiding Sweetgrass: Indigenous Wisdom,…, 1281
• DEEPTHINKING: This is Bandura’s core moral-disengagement mechanism stated as causal claim: language isn’t descriptive, it’s a channel through which harm becomes permissible.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Albert Bandura, Moral Disengagement: How People Do Harm…, 2694