I initially get your point and agree- Ppl that misuse academic ‘fancy’ language which doesn’t add value, or even lacks any sort of logical context to their own reasoning.. As a show off; -It makes me cringe, not to even mention how nauseating it is when/if they are not called out on their bs excessive word vomit.
In Sweden the phenomenon is called “red wine sipping world saviors”..
‘Sipping wine “intellectualizing” in the company of their (equally privileged) friends during all their excess leisure time, - Since daddy is still supporting them at the age of 32. That bubble offers an effective blind spot towards uncomfortable introspect, such as..: “The world is changed by your example, not by your opinion” (P. Coehlo). Hypocrites being hypocritical’. **
Then I find it more vague as to find what is the core point of your text.
Is it really just to relief some steem pressure, over the fact that some obnoxious folks use overly pretentious language?
Or is it maybe primarily an issue when some unspecified stereotypical “privileged upper class LEFTIST” in particular, uses this pretentious language?
How about if a republican Trump voter speaks in that same manner ?Someone that has huge college debts, struggle with part time jobs and “contributes to the real world”? Can it be that the same use of “pretentious words” doesn’t come across as empty; - if they come from someone that shares more similar values and life experiences as yourself?
Since I assume that we can agree on that ignorant, small minded ppl (who are either incapable of logical reasoning or doesn’t bother themselves with thinking before speaking out their ‘black n white’, un nuansed claims) ,- they speak in a broad variety of ways..(?)
Catchy sounding phrases, built by empty words come out in all types of language variations. Be it academic -or ‘thug life- ghetto- street chargong’ and all in between.
Would even go so far as claiming that the majority of what we hear and read on a daily basis comes from that sort of source. Affect driven, populistic, poorly reflected statements, a ‘mish mash’ of opinions camouflaged as facts.
I get that one gets frustrated, I really do. I could have written something similarly sour, in some stage of frustrated affect. Towards, let’s say; “all the fat middle aged sexist bureaucrats”, if I hypothetically had a slimy middle aged teacher disturbing me, or else valid reason to get wired up.
But using over generalizations and fall back on prejudiced, overly simplified, vague stereotypes, - is generally a sure fire way to erase any objective “valid point” of ones claims.
** “Straw man fallacy”
As a fallacy, the identification and name of straw man arguments are of relatively recent date, although Aristotle makes…en.m.wikipedia.org