I think there are two different processes at work that create euphemisms, which should be more clearly distinguished. One is indeed a natural feature of langua

I think there are two different processes at work that create euphemisms, which should be more clearly distinguished. One is indeed a natural feature of language development, in which a word slowly acquires more metaphorical connotations. The other process is strictly political, in which somebody in a position of power demands a thing to be renamed. The processes can be distinguished both by their speed and their effect on the mind of the speaker. The natural process is slow, to be measured in decades and centuries, and creates no intellectual conflict. The old and new word exist simultaneously for a period, until the old word is slowly forgotten and loses its meaning. The political process is rapid, to be measured in years, and creates anxiety within the speaker. He wants to use a certain word; he knows exactly what the word means, and he knows his listeners know as well. He chooses the new word merely because he fears negative consequences if he doesn't. I think all the examples from the article can be neatly categorized along these lines.