If you’re a frequent reader of this blog, you may remember that I already wrote a post about John Oliver last week, wherein I attempted to make the argument that John Oliver shouldn’t be trusted as a reliable authority on politics, given his status as a comedian, which requires him to poke fun at the issues. I knew that John Oliver was a progressive, and since he came from The Daily Show, that’s no surprise, but I was able to tolerate him, until his recent segment finally gave us critics what we were waiting for – a crack in his pretentious façade.
Like Barrack Obama before him, John Oliver decided on Sunday night to use his mighty platform to weigh in on Brexit, taking the side of the European Union. Once I found that out, I already knew that I wouldn’t enjoy this one bit, and you could accurately attribute this to my enormous pro-Leave stance, but at least I came to my stance by carefully looking at both sides, and finding Brexit to be the logical answer. John Oliver, meanwhile, took to virtue signalling (a favourite tactic of his) and slandering anyone who dares speak out about immigration, all while missing the point of the Brexit debate.
Oliver started by referencing a New York Times article which claims that the UK only pays £190 million a week to be in the EU (which Oliver claims is a reasonable cost). In reality, neither Vote Leave nor John Oliver are exactly right. According to FullFact and Civitas, we actually pay just shy of £250 million a week, which would amount to £13 billion a year, and we get back a net investment of £4.5 billion a year. Even if the weekly spending figure is less than what Boris Johnson has claimed, it would certainly be better to invest that money back into our underfunded public services. If we didn’t have to pay as much money to the EU, then we wouldn’t even need David Cameron’s half-cocked austerity measures. Of course, John Oliver doesn’t care about that. He only seems to care about Boris Johnson’s resemblance to Bamm Bamm from The Flintstones (how very ad hominem).
He then tried to debunk the amount of regulations the EU enforces, and he’s apparently in disbelief that the EU has this many regulations, and later described worries over regulation as “a red herring”. What he doesn’t know is that the EU’s vast sea of pointless regulations have turned the EU into a protectionist trading bloc, nor does he mention the Common Fisheries Policy (which was mentioned in Brexit: The Movie, which he cited), which effectively destroyed the British fishing industry. He also refuses to mention how large corporations favour those regulations because they can afford to comply with them, while smaller businesses are often strangled by EU regulations. In other words, most big businesses and financial firms back Remain because EU regulations protect them from failure by eliminating the competition. Of course, John Oliver won’t tell you that because he’s a progressive, and thus he’s in favour of the globalist EU.
Starved for an adequate Remain arugment, Oliver then tries to proclaim that “Obama knows best”. He appears to be of the persuasion that what the global elites favour is ultimately best for Britain, but he leaves out the opinions of experts who believe that Brexit may not mean a British recession. Of course, rather than give air to dissenting experts, he has chosen to instead decontextualise Michael Gove’s argument in order to make him sound like an idiot. His point wasn’t about dismissing the experts, it was about ordinary British people tired of being told what to think, and what he and fellow campaigner Gisela Stewart were trying emphasise is that in this debate, the voice of the voter matters more, which I thought was a fine argument. However, John Oliver has chosen to address it with mindless ad hominem slurs, which is exactly what he used when talking about Leave’s biggest supporter – the UK Independence Party.
For my international readers, the UK Independence Party (colloquially abbreviated as UKIP) is a political party in the UK that advocates for the UK’s independence from the European Union, and for tighter controls on immigration. Its leader, Nigel Farage, is depicted as a racist by the mainstream media in our country, and John Oliver is no better in that regard. In trying to explain his point about UKIP by focusing on party members who have been caught saying racist comments, as if that’s all that matters. Of course he would, he’s part of the progressive witch hunt. I really don’t care about race, and that’s why I really don’t care about other people making racist comments, so if John Oliver thinks he can convince me to side with the EU because their enemy is somehow racist, then he has obviously failed. The fact that Farage is willing to stand by his party’s “bad actors” (so to speak) doesn’t prove he’s a racist. It shows that he cares about his own party members, apparently more than Labour does. In fact, I’ve watched Brexit: The Movie, and I haven’t heard Farage make one racist slur, or make a single political argument based on race. Apparently that’s now the domain of the “tolerant” leftists. I find that Farage knows far more about the EU than most of the people campaigning for Remain, and I bet John Oliver knows this, which is why he finds himself unable to present a logical counterargument, and in the absence of an argument, he resorts to calling UKIP voters bigots. I’m not a UKIP supporter, and even I find that disgusting.
It would seem that Churchill, Farage and now I have come to the same conclusion about the left wing.
He then moves on to highlight how “toxic” the debate has become, and what he means by that is that the debate is toxic for the Remain camp, who have lost every reasonable argument. In an attempt to prove his point, he cites the murder of Jo Cox, who was stabbed and shot by Thomas Mair, a man who was suffering mental health issues, and sought an appointment on the night before the murder. What he won’t tell you is that pro-Remain news outlets immediately sought to capitalise on Jo Cox’s death before she had even died. The debate become toxic because of the dirty tricks of Remain, and when they say the debate had become toxic, that’s the Remain camp trying to silence the debate so that the referendum may turn out in their favour. The fact that John Oliver is siding with those con artists is unspeakable. What does John have to lose when we leave?
He also makes the false assertion that the UK would have to obey EU rules to get a good trade deal. He ignores the fact that Norway is not a member of the EU, and still trades with the EU without having to obey their rules. Switzerland is also wealthier and far more prosperous than any EU state, and it’s not an EU member. Of course, because John Oliver watched Brexit: The Movie, I would have thought that he’d know that. Given the amount of evidence available to him, I’m surprised he isn’t advocating for Brexit. Even if we can’t trade with EU states, we can still trade with more prosperous nations like Japan and America without any trouble.
He honestly believes that our country is about to do something insane. If anything, I think wanting to remain a member of a protectionist trading bloc that wishes to erase democracy is even more insane than wanting to leave it. If he wanted to make an objective case, why didn’t he mention the possibility of an EU army? Why didn’t he mention Greece being forced to accept unpopular austerity measures, or the time when Italy’s prime minister was replaced by an unelected technocrat, or the time when Ireland rejected the Lisbon Treaty and was forced to vote again? Why didn’t he mention the fact that the EU plans to work with Facebook and Twitter to censor speech that it finds objectionable? While we’re at it, how can he dismiss people’s concerns about immigration, when there is indisputable evidence to show that the EU’s reckless open border policy has led to terrorist incidents in Paris and Brussels?
Finally, John Oliver seems to think that it’s all about venting our desire to “tell Europe to go fuck itself”. We’re mad because the European Union is making it impossible to run the country as we the people see fit. We’re mad because the European Union is potentially making us vulnerable to terrorist infiltration thanks to its open border policy. We’re mad because our government is being controlled by a group of unelected and unaccountable wealthy elites. This is why the far right is gaining popularity in Europe, and unless we vote Leave, that tension is only going to get worse over time, and I fear it could lead to nationalist violence and revolutions across Europe.
Normally John Oliver is at least somewhat capable of making a reasoned argument wrapped in delicious comedy, but with his recent Brexit section, I don’t feel that way. I feel like I spent 15 minutes of my life watching an idiotic propaganda piece catering to privileged, middle class Americans who shouldn’t have any reason to care about our affairs. Honestly, this is why I would seriously consider siding with UKIP if Britain votes Remain, because they seem to be the only party with any shred of concern for the common man. What’s worse is that John Oliver might actually influence (primarily young) people in this country to sell out their own future.
I ask my British viewers, don’t believe John Oliver. He is incapable of grasping the true importance of Brexit, and that’s certainly the case if he has to resort to virtue signalling and ad hominem slurs in order to persuade you. He’s a liar and a charlatan, as all progressives are. I may sound a bit biased, but unlike John Oliver, I’m totally willing to be honest about that. Unlike that stuffy pretentious moron, I’ve got nothing at stake except the right to hold the leaders of the country accountable, and we can only secure that right, and the future of this country, by voting Leave on June 23rd. If you can’t stand liars like John Oliver, then Brexit is the sensible option. It’s our last chance to show those unelected technocrats that we aren’t willing to surrender our freedom, nor our dignity.