The Scapegoat’s Shadow

When Economic Anxiety Fuels a Nationalism of Convenience

In times of economic hardship, the human tendency to seek easy answers often leads to the blaming of external forces. This piece explores how the current affordability crisis is being framed through a nationalist lens, diverting attention from complex systemic issues and offering a convenient enemy.

The Spectre of Blame in the Affordability Crisis

Amidst the escalating affordability crisis of 2025, where the cost of living—from beef to rent—has become a daily burden for millions, a familiar political narrative has resurfaced. President Trump’s recent investigation into foreign-owned meatpacking giants, accusing them of price-fixing, is a stark example. This move, framed as a defense of the American consumer, taps into a primal human impulse: to find a tangible enemy responsible for our abstract anxieties. But is this a genuine pursuit of justice, or a strategic deflection, weaponizing economic hardship to bolster a nationalist agenda?

We find ourselves in a moment where the intricate dance of global supply chains and consolidated corporate power is reduced to a simple story of foreign villains. The probe into companies like JBS, a Brazilian-owned entity dominating the US meat market, resonates powerfully with an electorate grappling with rising grocery bills and a pervasive sense of economic insecurity. Yet, history teaches us that such convenient scapegoats rarely offer lasting solutions, often obscuring the deeper, more uncomfortable truths about our own systemic vulnerabilities and choices.

The Convenient Enemy and the Roots of Resentment

Why do we so readily embrace the narrative of the foreign scapegoat? The answer lies partly in human psychology and partly in political expediency. When faced with complex economic pressures—such as the 2.7% year-over-year rise in grocery prices and beef hitting a record $6.32 per pound—the mind yearns for simplification. An external enemy, a cartel of ‘foreign’ companies, provides a clear target for frustration, a definitive ‘other’ to blame rather than confronting the intricate, often uncomfortable, systemic failures within our own borders.

The ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist, but people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction (i.e., the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false (i.e., the standards of thought) no longer exist.

– Hannah Arendt, “The Origins of Totalitarianism”

Hannah Arendt reminds us of the danger inherent when the lines between fact and fiction blur, a fertile ground for demagoguery. This tendency to externalize blame serves a dual purpose: it offers psychological comfort by deferring responsibility, and it provides political capital by unifying a fragmented populace against a perceived common foe. The ‘America First’ doctrine, in this context, becomes a powerful tool, transforming legitimate economic concerns into a rallying cry against external influences, irrespective of their true causal weight.

The Invisible Hand and the Global Web of Markets

The antithesis to this simplified narrative is the undeniable reality of globalized markets and market concentration. The fact that four major companies control the US beef market is not a new revelation; it’s a longstanding concern that predates the current crisis and transcends national origin. JBS, despite being Brazilian-owned, is deeply embedded in the American economic fabric, employing thousands and operating extensive facilities across the nation. Its past antitrust settlements for price-fixing highlight a problem of corporate power and regulatory oversight, not solely one of nationality.

We must ask ourselves: Is the problem truly about *who* owns these companies, or *how much power* they wield regardless of ownership? This isn’t just about beef; it’s about the very structure of our industrial and agricultural systems. Relying solely on a nationalist lens prevents us from recognizing the systemic issues, such as inadequate antitrust enforcement, weak labor protections, and a supply chain vulnerable to shocks, which are equally—if not more—responsible for driving up prices and eroding consumer affordability. It creates a dangerous intellectual shortcut.

Navigating the Fog of Nationalism and Economic Reality

Our synthesis demands that we reconcile the innate human desire for simple explanations with the undeniable complexity of modern economics. The challenge is to distinguish genuine regulatory failure and corporate malfeasance from politically convenient scapegoating. While investigating price manipulation is crucial, attributing the entire affordability crisis solely to ‘foreign’ entities ignores the broader context of concentrated market power, inflationary pressures, and the intricate, often fragile, global supply chains that define our interconnected world. We are falling into a trap of our own making.

To allow the market mechanism to be sole director of the fate of human beings and their natural environment, indeed, even of the amount and use of purchasing power, would result in the demolition of society.

– Karl Polanyi, “The Great Transformation”

Karl Polanyi warned against the perils of an unchecked market, a warning that resonates profoundly today. The gravest danger lies not in foreign competition itself, but in our collective willingness to accept simplistic political theater instead of demanding genuine, structural reform. It is easier to point a finger across borders than to look inward at the domestic policies that have permitted such market concentration and vulnerability.

How to Resist the Allure of the Scapegoat Narrative

Resisting the siren song of the scapegoat narrative requires a conscious, ongoing effort. First, it demands intellectual vigilance: question rhetoric that demonizes entire groups or nations for complex problems. Look beyond the headline to understand the underlying economic mechanisms. Who benefits from this particular narrative? What deeper issues is it distracting us from?

Second, advocate for robust domestic policy. This includes strengthening antitrust laws to prevent excessive market concentration, investing in resilient local and diversified supply chains, and ensuring fair labor practices. These are actions that genuinely address the root causes of affordability crises, rather than merely reassigning blame. Finally, demand transparency from all corporations, regardless of their nationality, holding them to account for ethical business practices and fair pricing.

Beyond the Blame Game: Reclaiming Economic Sovereignty and Ethical Consumption

Ultimately, navigating the affordability crisis and the associated political rhetoric requires a commitment to truth over comfort, and complexity over simplification. Our true economic sovereignty is not achieved by isolating ourselves or blaming ‘foreign’ entities, but by cultivating a resilient, transparent, and ethically governed domestic economy that can withstand global pressures. It means understanding that our choices as consumers, and our demands as citizens, shape the market as much as any corporate strategy.

The current probe, whether political theater or genuine reform, offers an opportunity. It forces us to confront not just who controls our food supply, but how our collective anxiety is exploited, and how we can collectively demand a more equitable and stable economic future—one built on systemic integrity, not on the convenient shadows of blame.