Slop.

I agree with you about "apartheid," but often foreign words are used because there's some more specific context in which they are being used that happens to be in another language and so just keeping it in that language is more convenient, as we also did with "Soviet" or "Glasnost" (and note that the latter was regarded well by American media, so it wasn't used for villifying it). So when people say "Reich," it's not "empire" with spooky music because it's German (though you can analyze it on that level if you want), it's because Hitler built up a cosmology around the term with his mythology about the previous two "Reichs" and the "Thousand Year Reich" that was supposedly being born.

This is also used all the time in philosophy and other literary and artistic traditions for the same time. The most infamous example is probably "Dasein," which is literally just "being" but Heidegger was using the word to talk about a concept that I don't faintly understand and most others don't either, so we may as well just call it "Dasein" to note when we are talking about his concept to make things easier to follow. "Umwelt," more literally just "environment," refers to the environment as perceived by the subject in the sense of what the subject finds significant and how. For example, a picture on a wall is probably not going to be regarded almost at all by a dog unless they have some unusual conditioning affecting that, but people will regard pictures with more significance. Likewise, there are many noises that people will completely ignore and forget they heard moments after hearing it, but a dog will care a lot about some of those noises. Speaking of the dog's "environment" or even its "perceptual environment" is less clear than talking about the dog's "Umwelt," at least if you know the word in an academic context.

Edit: I distracted myself, but also we in English also use a more literal translation of totenkopf, "Death's Head," to refer to the Nazi symbol and especially to the SS unit most associated with it, but barely ever use it to mean "skull-and-crossbones," preferring either that term or "Jolly Roger" when used in reference to pirates. I really don't think this is a case of abusing language.

I can imagine being a kid and seeing an SS uniform without closeups in a documentary and your brain being like "yeah I got it, buncha military bullshit symbols and a swastika armband" without feeling the need to look closely at the exact military bullshit symbols, because you'd probably subconsciously expect an eagle or a shield or whatever until the first time you see an actual skull. And then that's the point where you're like "Haha, what the fuck?"