The Looming Guac-Apocalypse: How U.S. Trade Policies Could Reshape American Diets
For a moment, America teetered on the brink of a “guac-apocalypse.” President Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs on Mexico and Canada sent shockwaves through the food industry, threatening to send avocado prices soaring just in time for Super Bowl Sunday. While Trump’s saber-rattling about trade wars may have been a bluff, the grace period he negotiated with Mexico and Canada lasted a mere 30 days. With the president signaling that he would announce tariffs on even more countries in the coming weeks, the threat of a trade war—and its impact on American food staples—looms large. For now, the avocado crisis has been averted, but it’s a stark reminder of how fragile the U.S. food system is in the face of global trade disruptions.
The "America First" Food Policy: A Vision of National Self-Sufficiency
Central to Trump’s strategy is the “America First” ethos, which he applies to everything from trade to agriculture. The idea is simple: the U.S. should produce its own food rather than rely on imports. At first glance, this vision is appealing. Imagine a food system where Americans eat fresh, locally grown produce, support small farmers, and reduce reliance on foreign imports. This approach would encourage seasonal eating and a stronger connection to the land. But the reality of how Americans eat today couldn’t be further from that ideal.
The “America First” food system would require a radical overhaul of the way we produce and consume food. It would mean dedicating more land to fruits, vegetables, and nuts, and less to grains and sweeteners. It would also require addressing labor shortages, training more farmers, and building new infrastructure to process and distribute these crops. And even then, the challenges are daunting. Many specialty crops—like avocados, tomatoes, and berries—require specific climates, labor-intensive harvesting, and specialized equipment. For instance, while the U.S. already grows some avocados in California, Florida, and Hawaii, domestic production couldn’t come close to meeting current demand.
The Avocado as a Case Study: A Fruit of Obsession and Vulnerability
Avocados have become a cultural phenomenon in America, with the average person consuming over nine pounds annually. But more than 90% of these avocados come from Mexico, making them the country’s top fruit import by value. If Trump’s proposed 25% tariffs had gone into effect, the cost of avocados could have skyrocketed—potentially tripling in price. While the direct impact on consumers would have been significant, businesses like Chipotle, which rely heavily on avocados for their guacamole, would have felt the pain as well.
The challenge of replacing imported avocados with domestic production is stark. Avocado trees thrive in specific climates, and the U.S. lacks the land and labor to scale production to meet demand. Additionally, Trump’s immigration policies, which have already led to a shrinking farm workforce, would make matters worse. The result is clear: an “America First” food policy would force Americans to settle for fewer avocados—or pay a lot more for them.
Beyond Avocados: The Wider Implications for the U.S. Food Supply
The avocado crisis is just the tip of the iceberg. If the tariffs Trump has threatened are implemented, the cost of a wide range of imported foods—including strawberries, cucumbers, oranges, and processed goods—would rise sharply. The U.S. does produce enough food to feed itself in terms of total calories, but the reality is more nuanced. While America excels at producing grains, meats, and sweeteners, it imports a significant portion of its fresh produce. In 2022, for example, 69% of fresh vegetables and 51% of fresh fruits came from Mexico alone.
This reliance on imports isn’t a flaw—it’s a reflection of global interdependence. For example, Canada provides the U.S. with grains, beef, pork, and canola oil, which is a key ingredient in many processed and packaged foods. Cutting off these imports woulddrive up prices and limit options for consumers. The impact would extend beyond the grocery store, too. Even iconic American meals like McDonald’s burgers—made with sesame seeds from Mexico and canola oil from Canada—rely on imports.
The Practical Challenges of an "America First" Food System
While the idea of an “America First” food system is appealing in theory, the practical challenges are immense. For one, it would require a fundamental shift in agricultural priorities. More land would need to be devoted to fruits, vegetables, and nuts, which are often more labor-intensive and less profitable than crops like corn or soybeans. Additionally, many specialty crops require hand-harvesting, which can’t be easily replaced by machinery.
There’s also the issue of infrastructure. Specialty crops need specialized processing and transportation systems, which would require significant investment. And even if these challenges could be overcome, transitioning to a self-sufficient food system would take years, if not decades. For now, the reality is that the U.S. relies on imports to meet its dietary needs—and cutting those ties would have far-reaching consequences for both the economy and public health.
A Global Food System: The Interconnectedness of What We Eat
The guac-apocalypse near-miss highlights the delicate balance of the global food system. Americans have grown accustomed to eating fresh, diverse foods year-round, regardless of the season or their origin. This convenience comes at a cost, but it’s one that most consumers are willing to pay. The idea of returning to a more localized, seasonal diet resonates with some—especially those in the “Make America healthy again” movement—but it doesn’t align with how most people eat today.
Ultimately, the U.S. food system is a testament to global interdependence. From the avocados in your guacamole to the sesame seeds on your burger bun, the food we eat is a patchwork of imports and domestic production. While an “America First” food policy might appeal to nationalist sensibilities, the reality is that the U.S. relies on its neighbors—and the wider world—to feed its people. Any move to sever these ties would have far-reaching consequences for the health, diversity, and affordability of the food we eat.
