I once had an engineer who worked for me who always made things far more complicated than they were, just so he could claim to be the only one who understood it.
Lots of that going around. The "elites" come up with complex descriptions for lack of performance instead of just saying "it didn't work”. Academicians create their own languages, using words and phrases that are indecipherable to anyone not in their little clique because people tend to assign intelligence to people who sound smart when they are really saying nothing.
If you want to read something funny, read this link to something written by Chip Morningstar, a pioneer in software architecture, when he and a buddy of his had their first experience with deconstructionism in 1991. Here's a taste:
"We retreated back to Palo Alto that evening for a quick rewrite. The first order of business was to excise various little bits of phraseology that we now realized were likely to be perceived as Politically Incorrect. Mind you, the fundamental thesis of our presentation was Politically Incorrect, but we wanted people to get upset about the actual content rather than the form in which it was presented. Then we set about attempting to add something that would be an adequate response to the postmodern lit crit-speak we had been inundated with that day. Since we had no idea what any of it meant (or even if it actually meant anything at all), I simply cut-and-pasted from my notes. The next day I stood up in front of the room and opened our presentation with the following:
'The essential paradigm of cyberspace is creating partially situated identities out of actual or potential social reality in terms of canonical forms of human contact, thus renormalizing the phenomenology of narrative space and requiring the naturalization of the intersubjective cognitive strategy, and thereby resolving the dialectics of metaphorical thoughts, each problematic to the other, collectively redefining and reifying the paradigm of the parable of the model of the metaphor.'
This bit of nonsense was constructed entirely out of things people had actually said the day before, except for the last ten words or so which are a pastiche of Danny Kaye's "flagon with the dragon" bit from The Court Jester, contributed by our co-worker Gayle Pergamit, who took great glee in the entire enterprise. Observing the audience reaction was instructive. At first, various people started nodding their heads in nods of profound understanding, though you could see that their brain cells were beginning to strain a little. Then some of the techies in the back of the room began to giggle. By the time I finished, unable to get through the last line with a straight face, the entire room was on the floor in hysterics, as by then even the most obtuse English professor had caught on to the joke. With the postmodernist lit crit shit thus defused, we went on with our actual presentation."
The difference today, some 32 years on, is that nobody would recognize the gag and start giggling - they would just keep nodding because they are afraid to call bullshit even when they see it and they fear looking stupid in front of their stupider peers.
That's why our self-appointed elites can't stand people like Victor Davis Hanson and Thomas Sowell, they speak directly and plainly.
Search for “encabulator” on YouTube for dozens of examples.
It is shameful for people, aware of the fraud, to praise nonetheless the new clothes of the hairy, flabby indecently exposed Emperor.