If you’ve ever heard a politician shout, "path to prosperity" or or “traditional family values” and felt a twinge of excitement... congrats!!! You’ve been glittered!
In the realm of persuasive language, few techniques are as enduring as glittering generalities. These are emotionally appealing but deliberately vague statements that evoke positive feelings without offering concrete arguments, or substantive detail, or evidence and are very much used to persuade. They short-circuit and bypass critical thinking (ethos) appealing to emotions (pathos) and serve as rhetorical shortcuts which unite and motivate while also being completely manipulating. They are tiny hollow turds covered in sparkle dust which are effective because they rely on values and ideals that are broadly admired—such as patriotism, freedom, or justice, while avoiding specifics that could be scrutinized or debated.
The beauty of a glittering generality lies in its ambiguity - meaning everything and nothing at once. They are quick collections of vague words adored by bad Politicians and their ghost writers because they allow them to say absolutely nothing while sounding like they just walked off the set of a historical biopic - "Together, we will bring hope to every home, prosperity to every pocket, and justice to every jellybean." What does it mean? Who knows? Doesn’t matter. It's syrupy sweet sparkles and has the nutritional value of Cotton Candy. That’s the point. Bypassing reason and appealing directly to emotion makes them effective in gaining public approval or masking controversial policies. They are where meaning goes to die in a Sparkly Tuxedo. Great for applause lines, branding campaigns, and fridge magnets. But if you’re trying to actually understand something— policy, character, direction - it's no bueno. When low information voters accept these catchphrases, and put them on their own signs, they may find themselves supporting causes or products they do not fully outer, inner, over, or understand.
The term "glittering generalities" was formalized in the early 20th century, particularly during efforts to analyze and counter propaganda in wartime. After World War I, scholars and critics began to examine how language was being manipulated to serve political ends. One of the most influential institutions in this regard was the former USA agency "Institute for Propaganda Analysis" (IPA) which very little know about and came about prior to World War II but was concluded as the war was ramping up because it started sharing enemy propaganda techniques which, surprise surprise, were also starting to ramp up domestically. The IPA identified glittering generalities as one of the seven key propaganda techniques used to sway public opinion.
This tactic was seen repeatedly in political speech, military recruitment, and commercial advertising. By presenting abstract, feel-good concepts without actionable or measurable content, speakers could appeal to the broadest possible audience while remaining immune to factual rebuttal. Consider the phrase “Support our troops.” While emotionally resonant and seemingly patriotic, it is intentionally vague. Does supporting the troops mean endorsing a war? Saying it's okay to Napalm Vietnamese children? Claiming Bechtel charging $22 per mess hall spoon is not criminal? The statement invites affirmation without requiring reflection.
Glittering generalities history reveals how easily language can be weaponized to evoke trust and suppress scrutiny. In a world of slogans and soundbites, being able to identify one is more than an academic exercise—it is a rhetorical and civic skill. By recognizing these obviously manipulative BS phrases which are like reality TV: flashy, addicting, and suspiciously empty inside, individuals can cultivate a more critical lens through which to evaluate the messages they receive. Humans are suckers for pretty language. If it sounds good, we assume it is good. It’s like verbal glitter: it sticks to everything, makes a mess, and is nearly impossible to clean off your critical thinking. Not all emotionally resonant language is manipulative—but when a phrase feels too foggy, it’s worth stating "That's so vague and agreeable, it could be applied to literally any cause, including one you completely oppose."