A few years ago, I wrote a blog, emphasizing how risky it was for writers to use “inflexible” words such as always, never, and certain. Such words, I argued, “anchor the writer or speaker to a fixed position from which there is no escape, no backtracking.” An inflexible word could be especially harmful if used to uphold an argument against another person or group, which only has to show one contradiction to sink the argument for good.

Hyperbole — the deliberate use of an extreme exaggeration to emphasize a point — can also carry risk. I should admit that I often use (and even enjoy) using hyperbole. The other day, after struggling for hours to submit an application that required a YouTube video and other technical content that tested my patience, I announced to my wife that “tomorrow, I’m going to do something a little easier, such as scale the Matterhorn.”

There was no danger my wife or anyone else would be misled into thinking that I would soon be flying to Switzerland, purchasing mountain-climbing equipment, and then scaling that famous peak. My words were easily understood as a deliberate exaggeration to express my frustration with the application process. Indeed, we all recognize hyperbole when it occurs in a work of fiction or in daily conversation: “I’m so hungry I could eat a horse.” “I cried an ocean of tears.” “I’ve told you a million times to clean your room.” However, with the current political climate becoming increasingly volatile and hostile, it may be worth noting the danger of using hyperbolic words and phrases in our increasingly divided society.

People who interact with the public online, in their jobs, or in carrying out the duties of a government office need to be cautious. Before speaking or writing a hyperbolic word or phrase, they should ask themselves two questions. First, Is there any chance this word will be taken literally? Second, if it is taken literally, what harm (if any) will result?

These questions aren’t necessarily easy to answer. Recent events provide us with two examples. First, let’s take the word “Gestapo,” a word some MAGA opponents have applied to ICE officers seeking out undocumented immigrants in our cities. I certainly see this as an example of hyperbole. Hitler’s Gestapo used informants, house searches, and brutal interrogation methods, including torture, to crush any kind of opposition to the Third Reich. Its actions were not subject to legal restraint and it was accountable only to Hitler and Himmler.

The ICE has employed harsh tactics at times and they’ve seized a number of people who are in this country legally. Worse, they have killed two people in Minneapolis, possibly without justification. But if they were, in fact, another Gestapo, I suspect the death toll in Minneapolis would be much higher than two. And that entire city would be paralyzed by fear. So I’m guessing the people declaring ICE agents another Gestapo are using that word as hyperbole. But some people won’t see it that way. They will unfairly assume that every ICE agent is no better than the murderous thugs who carried out Hitler’s orders with neither mercy nor restraint.

Let’s look at another term that would appear to be hyperbolic — “domestic terrorist.” According to the FBI, a domestic terrorist is someone who commits violent, criminal acts” in order to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature.” That label has been stamped on at least one person caught up in the anti-ICE demonstrations in Minneapolis. Alex Pretti, the ICU nurse killed by ICE officers, was called a domestic terrorist by some White House officials. Videos did show him struggling with the officers on at least two occasions prior to his shooting, even going so far as to spit at them and kick the back of their car hard enough to dislodge a tail light. Pretti might be a scofflaw or an agitator, but a domestic terrorist? He had a gun, but never took it out and didn’t have any other weapon. In fact, as far as I can tell, although he got in the agents’ faces, he never tried to harm them. Real domestic terrorists leave a long trail of blood in their wake. But there are people, especially on the right, who will equate Pretti with genuine domestic terrorists like Timothy McVeigh and Dylann Roof.

For most of us, using hyperbole in our writing or conversation carries no great risk. We can talk about scaling the Matterhorn, crying an ocean of tears, or eating a horse with no fear of being misunderstood. But if you are in the public eye, please remember those two questions mentioned in the fourth paragraph. This country is already divided enough without anyone saying something that blasts it into a billion pieces.