As the year 2025 drew to a close, dictionary publishers worldwide engaged in their annual ritual of selecting a 'Word of the Year'. Oxford chose 'rage bait', Merriam-Webster picked 'slop', Cambridge went with 'parasocial', and Dictionary.com selected 'agentic'. These choices attempted to capture the spirit of the times. Yet, a deeper look reveals that the real 'slop' dominating public and policy discourse was not new slang, but a pervasive reliance on empty jargon and clichés that often served to obscure more than they explained.
The Diplomacy of Vague Phrases
In the realm of international relations and Indian foreign policy, 2025 saw a particular flourish of terminology that promised much but clarified little. A prime example was the ubiquitous use of the word 'deal'. Announcements of major deals, especially in peace and trade, became commonplace, yet were frequently followed by a prolonged waiting game with little tangible outcome. Conflicts persisted, and the promised benefits of 'strong fundamentals' in bilateral relationships often failed to materialize.
Policy experts and officials, however, assured the public with a suite of ready-made phrases. India was consistently praised for its skill in 'navigating uncertainty'. Its foreign policy approach was described as 'walking the diplomatic tightrope', a term meant to distinguish active, nuanced engagement from passive observation. Furthermore, hopes were pinned on a new form of 'multilateralism' to rescue the beleaguered 'rules-based international order'. These complex terms, while sounding sophisticated, often boiled down to a simple reality: a world where clear solutions remained elusive.
Technobabble and the AI Illusion
The phenomenon was not confined to diplomacy. The explosive growth of Artificial Intelligence (AI) brought its own lexicon of vagueness. A significant trend involved individuals with limited technical expertise confidently prescribing the need for 'guardrails' around advanced AI systems. This term became a catch-all solution, suggesting a controlled and safe development path without detailing the immense practical, ethical, and regulatory challenges involved. The discussion often prioritized buzzwords over substantive, actionable plans for governance.
Why Do We Rely on Empty Language?
The central question remains: why does such fancy, imprecise language gain so much traction? The answer may mirror a common experience in personal life, often described by younger generations as 'adulting'. In many complex situations—be it global geopolitics, economic turbulence, or technological disruption—no one possesses all the answers. The sheer scale of uncertainty can be overwhelming. In this environment, authoritative-sounding jargon becomes a shield. It creates an illusion of expertise and control. Some individuals and institutions simply become more adept at using this vague vocabulary to navigate conversations, masking a fundamental lack of clear direction or concrete solutions.
The year 2025, therefore, stood out not for the words dictionary publishers highlighted, but for the hollow phrases that saturated professional and political narratives. These terms acted as the ultimate 'rage bait' for a thinking public and served as a convenient smokescreen, allowing decision-makers to 'fake it' amidst unprecedented global complexity. The challenge moving forward is to demand clarity over cliché and substance over slogan.
