How does John Oliver critique the concept of civility in political discourse, particularly when it comes to discussing sensitive issues like racism?

John Oliver challenges the traditional notion of political civility by highlighting a fundamental contradiction in parliamentary procedure. When officials try to maintain "civility" by prohibiting the use of the word "racism" in political debates, Oliver points out the absurdity of this approach with his characteristic wit. His commentary suggests that true civility shouldn't come at the expense of calling out actual problematic behaviors or policies. By stating "if the word you don't want people to use is racism, I hate to break it to you, but you're doing a racism," Oliver argues that avoiding uncomfortable terminology doesn't make the underlying issues disappear. This perspective emphasizes that meaningful political discourse requires honesty and accountability, even when it makes participants uncomfortable, rather than maintaining superficial politeness that potentially enables harmful practices to continue unchallenged.