Successful competing minorities, not weak out-groups, become primary scapegoats

Evidence

The stereotype content model (see Fiske, ch. 3 this volume) suggests which groups are likely to be scapegoated. This model states that the structural relations between groups – their relative status and type of interdependence (competitive or cooperative) – determine the content of group stereotypes. High status or powerful (e.g., socioeconomically successful) minorities that are viewed as competing with the dominant group are subjected to envious prejudice: they are admired for their success, but also resented for it; stereotyped as highly competent, but as having hostile motives. Because envied minorities are viewed as having the power and intent to harm, they are at risk of being blamed for causing group-level frustrations. … In contrast, low-status groups – whether paternalized (see Jackman, ch. 6 this volume; Rudman, ch. 7 this volume) or treated with contempt – are stereotyped as incompetent, suggesting less ability and power to cause widespread misfortunes, making them less likely to be chosen as scapegoats. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 1585

Categorization

• XREF: Directly reverses the stereotype of the ‘defenseless victim’ scapegoat; also connects to anti-Jewish and anti-Chinese ‘model minority’ dynamics historically.
• CANDY: A clean, tweetable reversal: the scapegoat isn’t the weakest group but the most envied, competent, competitive minority.