Modern Politics in One Word

"Ideobabble" has become a problem on the Left and the Right

Photo by Kendall Hoopes

I recently heard the term “Ideobabble” for the first time, and as a former Marxist, I immediately loved it. It’s an intuitive word with a meaning obvious to anyone with political experience. Here is a simple definition: ideobabble is any language that is created or altered to promote a worldview by making it easier for someone to accept or oppose that worldview.

Ideobabble has two essential components: it’s created to promote a worldview, and it doesn’t add anything significant to that worldview. Instead, it tricks someone into adopting an essential idea as part of a larger argument. It’s essentially nonsense used to obscure real meaning or attach connotations that wouldn’t exist in plain language.

For example, I once had a discussion with a utilitarian. His belief was that everyone ought to maximize pleasure and minimize pain for all. After a while, I discovered he believed it was impossible for a rational person to do the opposite, and he attached no real value to the words “pleasure” or “pain.” To him, “pleasure” was just “stuff people do” and “pain” was “stuff people don’t do.” He had altered the meaning of those words to support his worldview, making his argument meaningless. You can’t get from an “is” to an “ought.”

Many utilitarians might say that doesn’t reflect their view, but that’s not the point. Ideobabble appears in official ideological movements and personal worldviews. This person was stuck in ideobabble, trying to believe two things at once.

Another example is from Marxist ideology. Marxists often use ideobabble to obscure key concepts from outsiders and to reinforce belief among followers. For instance, “The international lumpenproletariat must gain class consciousness through industrial unionism in order to seize the means of production from the bourgeois overlords of the capitalist order!” sounds like cult-speak to an outsider. A translation might be: “Wage earners around the world who aren’t aware of their lower status need to realize it and unite to take businesses from their owners. Once that happens, capitalism ends.”

That’s a lot of big ideas packed into one sentence. One benefit of ideobabble is that it compresses complex ideas, which helps explain its popularity. But this compression obscures meaning, even for insiders. When I wrote the ideobabble version, I didn’t mentally process it the same way as the plain-language version. This allows connotations to sneak in. For example, “proletariat” has a heroic ring, while “bourgeoisie” sounds sinister.

Yet nothing is added by saying “proletariat” instead of “wage worker,” or “bourgeoisie” instead of “business owner.” Ideobabble in Marxism often involves using obscure or large words to describe basic concepts that could easily be conveyed with clear terms. Still, the use of ideobabble is strategic. It helps convince others of a worldview, signals tribal belonging, obscures ideas from outsiders, and makes the beliefs seem more sophisticated than they are. It also gives ideologues flexibility, terms like “proletariat” help frame workers as a unified group, which makes Marxism’s claim of inevitable class conflict easier to accept.

Ideobabble is a kind of political euphemism. It’s most prevalent in large movements, likely because those that use it are more successful at gaining followers. As a result, nearly every ideology ends up using some amount of ideobabble. That’s a problem, because it’s hard to detect, especially when you’re the one using it or it’s being used on you. It’s designed to bypass critical thinking and push ideological adoption.

It’s important to distinguish ideobabble from technical or political shorthand. If language just makes concepts easier to discuss, it’s not ideobabble. It becomes ideobabble when it subverts critical thinking and encourages uncritical belief. That doesn’t make it inherently bad: if it’s used transparently, it can help adherents innovate within their worldviews. But when used as a cheap trick or taken as gospel, it should be avoided by anyone serious about seeking truth.

Common Types of Ideobabble

Denotational Ideobabble

• Misdefinitions – Redefining common words to push a worldview. Examples include the utilitarian “pain/pleasure” or modern redefinitions of “man” and “woman.” Misdefinitions try to get someone to accept a principle without realizing it.

• Newspeak – Terms invented to promote a worldview. These sound like gibberish to outsiders but add intellectual cachet for insiders. Newspeak makes beliefs feel deeper and more serious than they are.

Connotation Ideobabble

• Pejoratives – Terms like “fascist” or “communist” are used loosely to discredit opponents. These often abandon accurate definitions to push emotional responses.

• Virtue Signaling – Phrases like “science,” “basic human rights,” or “gender affirming care” signal ideological allegiance. This form of ideobabble doesn’t clarify arguments; it markets beliefs and reinforces group loyalty.