Designating a culprit in the face of a complex problem is an ancient reflex, one that has played out repeatedly in history. The story of absinthe’s ban in France offers a clear example of how this mechanism works. Once a popular drink among artists and the general public, absinthe was accused of causing madness, epilepsy, and even threatening the future of the French nation. A new study shows how absinthe became a scapegoat and how this pattern remains relevant today in addressing modern issues. Absinthe, made from wormwood, green anise, and fennel, was once a celebrated drink in French culture, enjoyed by figures like Baudelaire and Van Gogh. At the start of the 20th century, France consumed more absinthe than the rest of the world combined. However, within a few decades, the drink was banned and labeled the "national poison." This dramatic shift was not the result of a single event but a process that unfolded over time, involving multiple actors and social concerns. According to a recent study published in Organization Studies, the process of making absinthe a scapegoat involved three cycles of increasing intensity. It began with real concerns about alcoholism, France's military defeat against Prussia in 1870, and anxieties about national decline. Scientists, though their findings were inconclusive, introduced the term "absinthism" to describe a specific set of symptoms, including madness and epilepsy, supposedly caused by the drink. As anti-alcohol sentiment grew, producers of similar beverages, such as anise-based aperitifs, distanced themselves from absinthe. They used propaganda to contrast their products with absinthe, portraying the latter as deadly and the former as healthy. Wine producers, suffering from the devastating phylloxera crisis, joined in, framing their campaign as a patriotic effort to protect French heritage. Even absinthe producers in different regions began to turn on each other, targeting rivals in an attempt to save their own businesses. The study highlights a recurring pattern: initial social concerns lead to the designation of a convenient scapegoat. This scapegoat is close enough to the accepted group to share some characteristics but different enough to be excluded. The process often leads to a cycle of blame, where the more the targeted group shrinks, the more intense the attacks become. These "structures of opportunity for stigmatization" allow new targets to emerge, especially during times of crisis or uncertainty. Today, similar dynamics are visible in issues like the stigmatization of people of Asian descent during the COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing debate about the role of social media in youth mental health. In both cases, fear and uncertainty have led to the designation of scapegoats, even in the absence of conclusive evidence. The social media debate, for example, has seen many attribute rising rates of anxiety and depression among adolescents to platforms like Instagram and TikTok, despite the complexity of the issue and the limited scientific consensus on the extent of the impact. The story of absinthe serves as a reminder that the urge to identify a single culprit in complex problems is deeply human. However, as the history of absinthe and its modern echoes show, this reflex can often be more reflective of social mechanisms than a rigorous examination of the facts. In an era of growing concerns over health, identity, and inequality, this caution is more important than ever.