The Linguistic Crutches of Modern Libertarianism
Dave Smith is Particularly Part of the Problem
If I had a nickel for every time Dave Smith or another libertarian podcaster said “particularly,” I’d be running my own podcast about how to reform the Federal Reserve—though, like them, I might not actually get around to solving anything. This seemingly innocuous word, “particularly,” has become a linguistic crutch in libertarian circles, a placeholder for precision that often accomplishes the opposite.
The issue isn’t just one of vocabulary; it’s a reflection of deeper problems within libertarian rhetoric: the avoidance of resolution, an aversion to consensus, and the fetishization of endless debate. Dave Smith, host of Part of the Problem,* is particularly guilty of this habit (pun intended), which makes him a perfect case study for how this verbal tic reveals broader ideological stagnation.
The Overuse of “Particularly”
“Particularly” is, at its core, a soft qualifier. It’s a word that narrows focus, highlighting specific aspects of an argument. Used sparingly, it’s a useful tool for clarification. But in the hands of libertarian podcasters, it becomes a rhetorical crutch that evades clarity instead of providing it.
How “Particularly” Functions as a Crutch
- Adds Precision Without Commitment: Libertarians often use “particularly” to zoom in on details without addressing larger issues.
Example: “The Federal Reserve, particularly with regard to interest rates…” This hyper-focus on a detail avoids addressing the broader role of the Fed or proposing actionable solutions.
- Invites Specificity Without Resolution: By focusing on “particular” details, the speaker avoids making definitive claims or offering concrete conclusions.
- Creates a Fog of Importance: When everything is “particularly important,” nothing actually is. Overusing the word flattens distinctions and leaves listeners unsure about what truly matters.
Instead of advancing an argument, “particularly” often serves to stall it. It creates the illusion of depth while sidestepping resolution.
Dave Smith Is the Poster Child For This Particular Problem
Dave Smith’s show, *Part of the Problem,*therefore provides a perfect lens through which to analyze this phenomenon. For instance, Smith frequently overuses “particularly” as he dissects issues, such as government overreach or the Federal Reserve, yet fails to land on actionable conclusions.
I'm Particularly Annoyed Hearing This Free Speech Impediment
Smith’s overuse of “particularly” isn’t just a quirky speaking habit—it’s emblematic of a larger issue within libertarian discourse:
- Avoidance of Broad Conclusions: By focusing on “particular” details, Smith sidesteps discussions of systemic solutions, such as how libertarians might realistically address issues like taxation or governance.
- Rhetorical Escapism: “Particularly” becomes a get-out-of-jail-free card. If a listener challenges Smith’s point, he can pivot by emphasizing he was only discussing a narrow aspect of the issue.
A Particularly Particular Parody of This Particular Problem
To highlight this rhetorical habit, imagine the following exchange on Part of the Problem:
Dave Smith: “What we’re seeing with the Federal Reserve, particularly with regard to interest rates, is particularly egregious. But particularly in this context, it’s tied particularly to government overreach. And that’s why I’m particularly concerned about liberty—particularly in America.”
It’s an exaggeration—but only slightly. The overuse of “particularly” often stalls Smith’s rhetoric in circular analysis, making meaningful takeaways rare.
The Problem with Avoiding Resolution
The libertarian obsession with individualism often ultimately leads to an aversion to consensus. In their view, agreement can feel like conformity, and conformity, in turn, can feel like statism—something libertarians reflexively oppose. As a result, this mindset creates rhetorical patterns and habits that hinder meaningful dialogue and progress.
This mindset manifests linguistically in several ways:
1. Endless Debate
“Particularly” helps libertarians focus on minutiae, keeping the conversation alive without moving it forward. Endless debate becomes a feature, not a bug, of the discourse.
2. Fear of Action
By focusing on details, libertarians avoid the discomfort of collective decision-making. This creates a paradox: a movement ostensibly about liberty stalls its own progress by refusing to coalesce around solutions.
3. Alienation of Broader Audiences
For casual listeners, libertarian rhetoric can feel impenetrable or frustrating. Hyper-qualification (“particularly”) and jargon-heavy language alienate potential supporters who might otherwise align with their principles.
Linguistic Crutches and Cult-Like Tendencies
The overuse of “particularly” ties into a larger pattern of how cult-like ideologies manipulate language. Libertarian groups like the Misus Caucus or the Liberty Movement often redefine familiar words (e.g., “liberty,” “order”) to fit their frameworks.
How Cults Hijack Language
- Shifting Definitions: Words like “liberty” are twisted to mean loyalty to the movement, rather than freedom from control.
- Endless Clarification: Adherents are taught to speak in riddles, using qualifiers like “particularly” to muddy their arguments and avoid accountability.
- Reinforcement Through Repetition: Overusing vague terms creates dependency on leaders to “clarify” their meanings, fostering groupthink.
This linguistic strategy prevents followers from engaging with ideas independently, keeping them tethered to the movement’s rhetoric.
How to Fix This Particular Problem
If libertarian communicators want to broaden their appeal and drive meaningful progress, they must overcome these rhetorical habits. Here’s how:
1. Use “Particularly” Sparingly
Limit its use to genuinely important specifics. Otherwise, it risks becoming filler, undermining clarity and focus.
2. Focus on Conclusions
Stop avoiding systemic solutions. Address the big picture, even if it means engaging with uncomfortable ideas like collective action or compromise.
3. Embrace Clarity
Reject jargon and convoluted qualifiers. Speak plainly, prioritize action over debate, and avoid hyper-focus on irrelevant details.
4. Reclaim Language
Push back against the misuse of terms like “liberty” or “order.” Use their original definitions to foster clear, honest discussions.
My Particular Problem With Dave Smith Is He’s A Particularly Annoying Anti-Activist "Thought Leader"
The libertarian overuse of “particularly” is more than a verbal tic—it’s a symptom of deeper issues within the movement. By focusing on minutiae and avoiding resolution, libertarian communicators risk alienating their audiences and stalling their own progress.
Dave Smith’s Part of the Problem* exemplifies this trend, but it’s a broader issue across the libertarian podcasting sphere. If libertarians want to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem, they need to let go of linguistic crutches, embrace clarity, and start moving from rhetoric to action.
Particularly speaking, that’s the way forward.