Re: Sesquipedalian Bollocks.
No, the "gentrification" example doesn't show that using "obscure" words is the road to faceloss, it just gives an example of a bloviating politician. "Gentrification" is well-established, and very widely used in the neighbourhoods it threatens.
I think the silly 'protect the words' outcry is based very much on illogic: English has more words than any other language, ergo no thanks we've got enough, the borders are closed, first fully employ the ones we already have; plus now a push to become a one-person verbodiversity hotspot... Clearly (and tested), English speakers do not use more words on average (and the Sun doesn't use less diverse words than the Times) --- it is just spoken as first or second language by a vastly more diverse population than any other language; a Raj colonial infuses words he picks up locally, and a Jamaican injects some patois...
Then there's the simple fact that few words have a fixed, official 'meaning'; "stink" used to mean "smell", and now "smell" tends to be negative as well ("what's that smell?", not "smell the flowers!").