If you see left and/vs/or right ideology like this,
<-----[Extreme Left]-----[Left]-----[Center]-----[Right]-----[Extreme Right]----->
and can bend it into a loop to see it like this,
[Center]
---
[Left] /// \\\ [Right]
--- ---
\\\ ///
---
[Extreme Left/Right]
then you might be able to consider how we've been purposefully misled to not see this,
[Good]
---
///|||\\\
[C e n t e r]
\\\|||///
---
[Evil]
and It might also explain why there's so much confusion between left and right where only two aims are clear: the many extremes walking the wide path, and the few centered walking the narrow path.
Biblical
The Great Awakening
You made the claim "there are no 'jews.'" That is not a true statement. There are obviously jews. Whoever else they might be is worth digging in to, and in any such dig, if you provide supporting evidence, I suggest it would be beneficial to the conversation to call them whatever you want because it would (presumably) make sense in context.
In any other context, it would not make sense, and would only cause confusion because literally everyone knows who the jews are.
Calling them Atlanteans may be true, or may be completely false, or may even be a psyop designed specifically to create division with planted evidence (those things exist far broader than most people realize). All using the word "Atlanteans" would do in off context conversations (a word few really understand, and may not even be real in any scope), when what you really mean is "jews" (a word everyone understands and is undeniably real in some scope) would be to cause confusion, division, and cognitive dissonance. It would not help advance any conversation or investigation unless the investigation/conversation were specifically about that topic itself. (Or you wanted to direct the conversation in that direction, which I admit is sometimes helpful, but would be very annoying if it were constantly applied).
The word requires context or it is problematic.
There is nothing wrong with the word problematic. It may ruffle your feathers, but it communicates exactly that there are extrinsic problems with something. If communication is not confused, then it is not problematic. If it is confused, which is what your suggestion was aimed to do, it is.