Skip to main content

Trump's anti-China rhetoric followed by Biden 'impacts' even top anti-race comedian

By Allison Lau, Lauren Gonitzke* 

In mid-December 2021, South African comedian Trevor Noah used “The Daily Show” to target China when he aired a segment titled “Why China Is in Africa.” While this segment was advertised as an informed, nuanced overview of the complex international relationship between China and many African states, it mainly reinforced the debunked myth of “debt-trap diplomacy” to its American audiences, ending with a throwaway line about #StopAsianHate.
The myth of “debt-trap diplomacy” claims that China is using its financial resources to ensnare African countries, coercing them to hand over their natural resources at lower prices. In a recent interview with CODEPINK, Mikaela Nhondo Erskog, an educator and researcher, explains why Noah had such a disappointing take: “It was [former U.S. Secretary of State Mike] Pompeo who coined the term, or popularized it, the Chinese ‘debt trap,’ and… it is disappointing that there was no effort to look into the multiple available sources who give extensive detailing of how this is a myth.”
As part of the Comedy Central roster, “The Daily Show” describes itself as “an Emmy- and Peabody Award-winning program that looks at the day’s top headlines through a sharp, reality-based lens.” Noah and “The Daily Show” are part of a larger dynasty of late-night TV and satirical comedy in America. These shows gained traction particularly during the Bush and Trump eras.
The COVID-19 pandemic has forced late-night shows to reformat from a studio sofa to a living room sofa, and changing political contexts following the election of President Biden have posed challenges to the genre. Like many other liberal media outlets, they are experiencing an audience decline following the ousting of Trump (and his easily targeted absurdities) from the presidency. For instance, in August 2021, “Gutfeld!”—Fox News’ “response to the left-leaning programming [of late-night television] on broadcast networks,” hosted by conservative Greg Gutfeld—overtook Stephen Colbert’s “Late Show” in viewers.
It’s not just the post-Trump era that has led late-night shows to adjust their formats. Young people are increasingly turning to social media for news, and the organic growth of niche political spaces on TikTok and the proliferation of political memes from across the spectrum have challenged conventional late-night comedy for entertaining political commentary. In summary: late-night TV no longer offers biting, edgy, or original analysis that draws viewers in the first place.
So what now? Is the pivot by “The Daily Show” to the China issue symptomatic of a larger decline in late-night television, or is it more indicative of the liberal tendency to challenge the status quo only insofar as it helps grow their viewership?
This particular “Daily Show” segment carries water for the U.S. war machine by jumping on the bandwagon to paint China as a villain. It seems the producers and writers believe that mimicking Trump-era State Department talking points will reclaim lost viewers.
Whatever the intent, the results are abysmal.
Noah’s predecessor, Jon Stewart, changed the late-night game when he took over “The Daily Show” and began to take an “overt stand” on the events and issues he presented, turning young viewers’ attention away from traditional news and journalistic sources. Other hosts such as Stephen Colbert, John Oliver, and Seth Meyers followed suit. The rise in late-night political commentary TV may be attributed to the decline in trust of the mainstream media in a post-9/11 era. They took the absurdities and tragedies of modern politics and made it funny, digestible, and easier to process—an ‘if I don’t laugh I’ll cry’ moment. These commentaries often relied on satirical caricatures of presidents, poking fun at their big personalities or scandals. This was especially the case for an already cartoonish Trump; he was a narcissistic sexual predator, riddled by scandal after scandal, and inept without a shred of self-awareness.
Underlying this political commentary, which has largely been liberal leaning, is a moral posturing absent in the more apolitical late-night of yesteryear. Such comedy has been reactive, defining itself against the conservatives such as Trump, George W. Bush and Fox News. During the Trump era, late-night TV could pose as progressive and even radical. Following George Floyd’s murder in 2020, many late-night hosts, including less political ones like Jimmy Fallon, paid tribute to Floyd and spent time elevating Black voices, addressing white privilege, and challenging police brutality. They were critiquing oppressive systems, establishing themselves on the right side of the conversation. Even in doing so, they were late to acknowledge and address this conversation, as the Black Lives Matter movement has been a public conversation for years now.
And now that the manic news cycle of Trump has ended, it’s easy to see how Biden seems downright boring by comparison within this late-night market.
Biden is exactly like his predecessors before Trump. His promise to a “return to normalcy” appealed to liberals because they wanted the U.S. to reclaim a veneer of “respectability” on the global stage, more concerned with the aesthetics of the presidency than the actual impact of the office and its policies.
The truth of the matter is that Biden has continued many Trump-era policies, with only a clean-up of their branding. For instance, the conditions at the detention centers at the U.S.-Mexico border remain horrific, but upon Biden taking office, the media started calling them “migrant holding facilities.” Anti-China rhetoric, which escalated massively during the COVID-19 pandemic under Trump, is now being followed with policy under the new administration. The U.S. Innovation and Competition Act (USICA) is a Frankenstein’s monster-like combination of several targeted anti-China bills—including the Endless Frontier Act, the Strategic Competition Act of 2021, and the Meeting the China Challenge Act that passed with bipartisan support in the Senate in June 2021.
A leading voice in late-night TV for social justice and racial equality, Noah’s take was disappointingly pedestrian, reinforced by bipartisan elite propaganda
When the main fodder for your show is taken out of office and banned from Twitter, where do you go? How do you maintain an audience’s attention span as a new generation of young people shift from traditional television to social media for entertainment? Perhaps Noah’s China segment can give us a clue. 
As one of the leading voices in late-night TV for social justice and racial equality, Noah’s take was disappointingly pedestrian at best, and reinforced bipartisan elite propaganda at worst. In the same CODEPINK interview as with Nhondo Erskog, Congolese activist Kambale Musavuli suggests it is likely the latter; “What Trevor Noah put in his video was definitely an equivocation, and it should not be taken as fact. He has access to this recent information, but he chose not to present it, he chose to skew the information to join the group of those who are pushing anti-Chinese sentiment around the world.”
Liberal satire (not unlike that of any other political persuasion) thrives off of making fun of chaos and ineptitude, whilst positioning itself as being on the ‘right side’ of the dialogue. There always has to be a construction of a larger-than-life, one-dimensional enemy to laugh at. Ronny Chieng playing a character representing all of “China” battling Noah as the continent of “Africa” draws a parallel to other caricatures, such as Alec Baldwin’s Trump on “Saturday Night Live,” or Jordan Peele’s Obama on “Key and Peele.” If we make it ridiculous, it’s less threatening, and gets views. However, as Nhondo Erskog points out, these satirical characterizations have real-life impacts for real-life people: “This is a moment in which to be sensitive around how we talk about China in relation to the Chinese diaspora that continues to experience extremely brutal forms of violence and abuse is a bit saddening as a person who comes from a context knowing what racism is, and how racism destroys families and destroys lives and destroys communities.” Not only does this contribute to already heightened sinophobia and racism against Chinese Americans (and other Asian Americans more broadly), but it also reinforces narratives by American elites that build popular support for U.S. aggression against China, and militarism in the Asia-Pacific that is destroying communities and ecosystems.
Does it even matter whether late-night TV portrays accurate information? One month before the 2020 election, the Guardian summed it up best: “The shows do, after all, retain huge audiences, with institutional legitimacy and social media platforms that reach millions.” Even in the lean post-Trump years of late-night audiences, these shows still have the potential and ability to shape public perception and reinforce imperialist beliefs.
Perhaps late-night TV was once the alternative to mainstream news programs for millennials, but it has lost its relevance in the social media era. These comedians are unable to capture younger audiences who have differing senses of humor and crave not only sharp critique, but meaningful analysis that doesn’t shy away from confronting U.S. imperialism and the empire.
---
*Allison Lau is the coordinator for CODEPINK’s China is Not Our Enemy campaign; Lauren Gonitzke is the campaign assistant for CODEPINK’s China is Not Our Enemy campaign. Source: Independent Media Institute. This article was produced by Local Peace Economy, a project of the Independent Media Institute

Comments

TRENDING

Was Netaji forced to alter face, die in obscurity in USSR in 1975? Was he so meek?

  By Rajiv Shah   This should sound almost hilarious. Not only did Subhas Chandra Bose not die in a plane crash in Taipei, nor was he the mysterious Gumnami Baba who reportedly passed away on 16 September 1985 in Ayodhya, but we are now told that he actually died in 1975—date unknown—“in oblivion” somewhere in the former Soviet Union. Which city? Moscow? No one seems to know.

Love letters in a lifelong war: Babusha Kohli’s resistance in verse

By Ravi Ranjan*  “War does not determine who is right—only who is left.” Bertrand Russell’s words echo hauntingly in our times, and few contemporary Hindi poets embody this truth as profoundly as Babusha Kohli. Emerging from Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, Kohli has carved a unique space in literature by weaving together tenderness, protest, and philosophy across poetry, prose, and cinema. Her work is not merely artistic expression—it is resistance, refuge, and a call for peace.

Swami Vivekananda's views on caste and sexuality were 'painfully' regressive

By Bhaskar Sur* Swami Vivekananda now belongs more to the modern Hindu mythology than reality. It makes a daunting job to discover the real human being who knew unemployment, humiliation of losing a teaching job for 'incompetence', longed in vain for the bliss of a happy conjugal life only to suffer the consequent frustration.

Asbestos contamination in children’s products highlights global oversight gaps

By A Representative   A commentary published by the International Ban Asbestos Secretariat (IBAS) has drawn attention to the challenges governments face in responding effectively to global public-health risks. In an article written by Laurie Kazan-Allen and published on March 5, 2026, the author examines how the discovery of asbestos contamination in children’s play products has raised questions about regulatory oversight and international product safety. The article opens by reflecting on lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic, noting that governments in several countries were slow to respond to early warning signs of the crisis. Referring to the experience of the United Kingdom, the author writes that delays in implementing protective measures contributed to “232,112 recorded deaths and over a million people suffering from long Covid.” The commentary uses this example to illustrate what it describes as the dangers of underestimating emerging threats. Attention then turns...

Buddhist shrines were 'massively destroyed' by Brahmanical rulers: Historian DN Jha

Nalanda mahavihara By Rajiv Shah  Prominent historian DN Jha, an expert in India's ancient and medieval past, in his new book , "Against the Grain: Notes on Identity, Intolerance and History", in a sharp critique of "Hindutva ideologues", who look at the ancient period of Indian history as "a golden age marked by social harmony, devoid of any religious violence", has said, "Demolition and desecration of rival religious establishments, and the appropriation of their idols, was not uncommon in India before the advent of Islam".

Echoes of Vietnam and Chile: The devastating cost of the I-A Axis in Iran

​ By Ram Puniyani  ​The recent joint military actions by Israel and the United States against Iran have been devastating. Like all wars, this conflict is brutal to its core, leaving a trail of human suffering in its wake. The stated pretext for this aggression—the brutality of the Ayatollah Khamenei regime and its nuclear ambitions—clashes sharply with the reality of the diplomatic landscape. Iran had expressed a willingness to remain at the negotiating table, signaling a readiness to concede points emerging from dialogue. 

Authoritarian destruction of the public sphere in Ecuador: Trumpism in action?

By Pilar Troya Fernández  The situation in Ecuador under Daniel Noboa's government is one of authoritarianism advancing on several fronts simultaneously to consolidate neoliberalism and total submission to the US international agenda. These are not isolated measures, but rather a coordinated strategy that combines job insecurity, the dismantling of the welfare state, unrestricted access to mining, the continuation of oil exploitation without environmental considerations, the centralization of power through the financial suffocation of local governments, and the systematic criminalization of all forms of opposition and popular organization.

The kitchen as prison: A feminist elegy for domestic slavery

By Garima Srivastava* Kumar Ambuj stands as one of the most incisive voices in contemporary Hindi poetry. His work, stripped of ornamentation, speaks directly to the lived realities of India’s marginalized—women, the rural poor, and those crushed under invisible forms of violence. His celebrated poem “Women Who Cook” (Khānā Banātī Striyāṃ) is not merely about food preparation; it is a searing indictment of patriarchal domestic structures that reduce women’s existence to endless, unpaid labour.

The price of silence: Why Modi won’t follow Shastri, appeal for sacrifice

By Arundhati Dhuru, Sandeep Pandey*  ​In 1965, as India grappled with war and a crippling food crisis, Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri faced a United States that used wheat shipments under the PL-480 agreement as a lever to dictate Indian foreign policy. Shastri’s response remains legendary: he appealed to the nation to skip one meal a day. Millions of middle-class households complied, choosing temporary hunger over the sacrifice of national dignity. Today, India faces a modern equivalent in the energy sector, yet the leadership’s response stands in stark contrast to that era of self-reliance.