I think so, Brain … but isn’t euphemism itself a euphemism for lying.
One of the presuppositions behind truthful communication in Western Civilization is that the language used will have sufficient commonality among the talkers and listeners that both sides of the conversation will have similar understanding of what is being said. That doesn’t seem to a valid basis for approaching what many on the Left are now saying and writing. They are using old words with new and often contradictory meanings as well as using new, ill-defined terms.
Consider the word sedition. It is defined in law as an act or conspiracy to overthrow the government, to prevent it from acting lawfully, or to unlawfully seize government property. Some on the left are now trying to spin using the courts to prevent the government from acting unlawfully as sedition, using the word exactly opposed to is definition in law. It’s hard to follow an argument that is based in the premise that A and not-A are the same thing, particularly for those of us we still think 2+2=4 or can remember when we weren’t at war with EastAsia.
And then there’s all these new pronouns and categories of oppressed people. I keep losing track. I can’t remember if the Gostak is the oppressed or the oppressor or whether its a good to be the distimor or the distimee. Or whether Doshes have come up at all during 2020.
For now, I’m sticking with Standard American English as my primary language rather than the media’s Newsspeak. I’ve lived in America for 73 years now. If new immigrants don’t have to learn a new language, why should I?
UPDATE—The Gostak and the Doshes
Gentle Reader, I don’t know if your doshes are galloons. YMMV.