Basics of basically

Sitting in the midst of my interim thesis viva presentation, I couldn't help but listen to the plethora of basicallies spewed into the air by everyone while speaking. Intrigued by this, and inspired by this fad of writing pretentious articles analyzing indicators of forever ensuing trends (even when you don't know shit about it) an arbitSpeculation had to arise out of the attic.

Follow this link if you're the kind of reader who does.
If not, I won't basically define basically for you, but I will embed this oh-so-geeky graph of the usage of the word.

[insert random quote that sounds pretty impressive]
Orwell wrote: "If thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought."

[rant about what I think]
 I personally believe, that the moment we utter a crutch word, we enter into a zone that relaxes our requirement for vocabulary/sentence frame. It depicts how taxing it is for us to use well framed vocabulary rich/foreign language, that we need a mid landing after the flight of stairs our linguistic side of the brain has been climbing. (I plead guilty for this architectural analogy). Don't get me wrong here. It does not in any way signify the grasp over the language- but the enrichment.
One thing I have noticed, is that upon saying basically, the following sentence is almost like a hurried grasp of words and prepositions and articles and a haphazard stitching with the thread of 'um'. I don't think this would have happened if I, or others, were well prepared. Or if they knew what to say. Or if they knew the answer to the question. Or if they had a better grasp on this foreign language colonizing the whole world.

[insert entirely unrelated research paper stuff]
Researchers have identified the word as a key component of so-called "Estuary English". Linguist David Rosewarne, who invented this term, identified two of its crucial items of vocabulary. "'Cheers' is often used in place of 'thank you', but it's also possible for it to mean 'goodbye'. The word 'basically' is used frequently in conversation."

[cleverly analyze the trends]
But if Google shows the number of mentions as rising in the 1950s till the maxima at the 1980s, I'd suggest that the 1950s saw the rise in the social revolution, the counter culture, the second wave feminism. It was the baby boom generation that went into a row of communication and selling. People were demanding for their rights. There was a greater degree of expression. Expression requires language. Language, if not filled, requires filler words.
But what about the decline after the 1980s? Atomized individuation. How the madmen needed to be more explicit while communicating. The need for saying more with less. The presentations and pitchings.
Kink in after the double-ohs? Blogging among the masses, and hence, greater need for a crutch word.

[a little knowledge is a dangerous thing]
The graph shows usage of words in books. It may or may not directly relate to the usage among the masses. It is indicative of how the word began penetrating the written domain unless some populist like Gladwell wrote against this word (maybe) and it spun off like a crazy idea due the bandwagon effect.

Basically, my entire analysis was wrong(?) and gobbledygookish.

[cover up by digressing reader's line of thought]
On the same interesting note, take a look at the graph of literally. Looks like this is one word that's never going out of usage. Think about this rise and fall and tell me. The comments section is hungry.