The most recent spate of histrionics from establishment progressives had to do with an early January Oval Office meeting President Donald Trump attended with lawmakers. At the meeting, Trump reportedly criticized the destabilizing effect of our government’s prolonged and continuing importation of those from “s—hole countries” (expletive modified) into the U.S. In fact, the pretentious outrage has outlasted many more noteworthy news cycles to date, and we’ve probably not heard the last of it.

The fact is that whether Trump actually made this statement or not, it was never reliably confirmed – not that such trifles matter to his detractors. In their desperation, they feebly attempted to cite this affront as affirmation that our president is an uncouth mental defective (and a racist, of course) who should be removed from office.

Cuss words! Our virgin ears! How un-presidential! Harrumph and how darest thou, Sir …

Colloquialisms – particularly vulgar ones – can be dangerous regardless of venue, and they certainly carry impact. Recently, I heard an actor friend of mine drop the “f-bomb” at least two times during the course of a short scene in a film, and my head nearly exploded. Is it because I eschew the use of obscenity? Hardly – it was because I’d never heard the man swear in all the years I’ve known him. He simply isn’t in the habit of employing that sort of language, but it never registered in my mind until I heard him deploy the bunker-buster oath, twice, for all the celluloid cosmos to hear.

Should the oratory of high-ranking elected officials and dignitaries resemble that of comedian Chris Rock as a matter of course? Probably not, because it puts a lot of people off, and politics is a “people business.” Habituated use of vulgar language has backfired on some who usually temper their own utterances, as anyone who has seen liberal commentator Bob Beckel on Fox News can attest. I handily dismantled Mr. Beckel on Sean Hannity’s radio show a few years back without swearing once. In his defense, he didn’t cuss at me, either.

So it should go without saying that any American president probably ought to gauge his words with due alacrity.

The significant issue concerning this now-iconic offensive statement bespeaks a global truth – but one that all involved in the discussion have missed. On Jan. 13, retired Navy SEAL Erik Prince concurred with Trump’s s-hole statement based on his deployments worldwide. Millions more concurred with his appraisal.

Agreement with Trump’s alleged faux pas, widespread or not, is hardly the point either. Suffice it to say that there are innumerable nations, principalities and warlord-run Third World outfits that qualify as “s-holes” by Western standards.

If we focus on such trivialities as whether the president said something coarse or untoward rather than focusing on the basis for his alleged statement, we entirely avoid the heart of the matter, and the question everyone ought to be asking: Why do these “s-holey” nations exist in such notable squalor in the first place?

When I first became acquainted with the concept of globalism many years ago, my appraisal was that if other nations could be convinced to adapt to the model of the constitutional republic and free market economies, things would hum along rather smoothly on this planet. This of course was not what globalist elites were offering; by now, we are well-familiar with their intent to implement oligarchical collectivist rule, redistributing the wealth of working people in developed nations in order to serve them and ingratiate themselves to Third World dictators and capricious trade partners as they advance the agenda. Some of the more morally challenged (or manifestly insane) ones see a perverse sense of justice in facilitating the intentional suffering of citizens in developed nations via mass immigration from the Third World and the provision of weapons of mass destruction to retrograde foreign governments.

Even as a young man, I could see the folly of summarily superimposing capitalism and democracy over systems that have been in place in other nations for centuries, and which are often in direct conflict with native cultures and social systems. This Western leaders have sought to do over the years with their proclivity for nation-building. The practice has not only been to the distinct economic detriment of their own constituents, but invariably engendered antipathy for the ostensible benefactor nations.

In short, the idea of creating a harmonious global community consisting of enlightened billions who’ve seen the wisdom and parity of the American system is just as unlikely from a practical standpoint as the theoretical Utopia global socialists espouse.

Here is why these allegedly s-holey nations exist in such squalor: Because, like so many evils perpetrated by global elites, there are socioeconomic imperatives for the status quo. Corporate greed and crony capitalism plays a part, but it is the globalist power players who foster and sustain the phenomenon of “s-hole” countries, all the while blaming whites, capitalism and the West in general for all attendant malaise.

In the end, global elites like the ones excoriating Trump for calling a spade a spade need “s-hole” nations for the same reason they need disenfranchised demographics here at home – to justify their own existence.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.