The United States stands at a crossroads, weakened not only by external adversaries but by internal fractures that amplify their impact. The metaphor of a biological parasite—quietly infiltrating, doping, and consuming its host—aptly describes the systemic challenges facing the nation. This article traces a chilling thread: how Apple’s transfer of technological know-how to China has empowered a strategic rival, how the fentanyl crisis acts as a literal and figurative drug to numb and divide the populace, and how external enemies may be exploiting America’s democratic openness and internal divisions to advance their goals. We conclude by asking whether democracy itself is in crisis and if adversaries are using it as a tool to further their parasitic agenda.
Over the past two decades, Apple—one of America’s most iconic companies—has played a pivotal role in empowering China’s technological ascent. By outsourcing more than 90% of its manufacturing to China, Apple leveraged low labor costs (as little as $1–2 per hour) and world-class infrastructure. Yet this came at a steep price: the transfer of critical knowledge and capabilities that transformed China from a low-cost workshop into a global technological powerhouse.
When asked why Apple would not bring manufacturing back to the U.S., Tim Cook responded bluntly: “In the U.S., I’m not sure we could fill a room with tool engineers; in China, you could fill multiple football fields” (Cook, Fortune Global Forum 2017) (china.org.cn, appleinsider.com). What Cook did not say: this capacity did not exist when Apple arrived. Apple itself built it.
According to Patrick McGee (Apple in China), the company committed $275 billion between 2016–2021 in infrastructure, technology, and human capital—an investment comparable (and in sectoral terms larger) than the Marshall Plan (prospect.org, vanityfair.com). By 2015, Apple was already spending $55 billion annually in China, much of it on training engineers, building factories, and optimizing supply chains. That figure is nearly four times larger than the U.S. CHIPS Act itself (moneycontrol.com). In effect, Apple incubated from scratch a rival industrial ecosystem with resources equivalent to several Marshall Plans.
China’s industrial strategy demanded this outcome. Foreign firms seeking access to its market were required to integrate with local suppliers, share expertise, and train workers. Apple complied, teaching Chinese firms advanced techniques in display, chip, and camera-module production. Companies like Huawei, Xiaomi, and BYD rose by leveraging the know-how initially transferred from Western corporations.
Meanwhile, Apple’s market valuation soared to $3.55 trillion, yet its dependence on China became existential. Analysts warn that producing an iPhone outside China could cut its value in half due to the absence of comparable infrastructure elsewhere.
Was this betrayal? Not in the conspiratorial sense—but in the strategic sense. Apple’s pursuit of short-term profit empowered a rival capable of challenging U.S. technological dominance. This is the first act of the parasitic playbook: the host (the U.S.) unwittingly nurtures the parasite (China), sharing its lifeblood while eroding its own defenses.
If Apple’s technological transfer represents the economic dimension of parasitism, the fentanyl crisis is its literal and devastating manifestation. Fentanyl, a synthetic opioid 100 times more potent than morphine, is the leading cause of drug overdose deaths in the U.S., accounting for 60% of the 80,000 overdose deaths in 2024. The crisis is particularly acute in cities like San Francisco, Chicago, and Philadelphia’s Kensington neighborhood, where open-air drug markets thrive, claiming thousands of lives annually (e.g., 800 deaths in San Francisco in 2023, 2,000 in Illinois, 1,200 in Philadelphia).
The origins of this crisis point to external actors. China is the primary source of fentanyl precursors and pill presses, which are shipped to Mexican cartels like Sinaloa and CJNG for production and distribution. A 2025 federal indictment in Ohio accused four Chinese companies and over two dozen individuals of conspiring to distribute fentanyl, highlighting the scale of this operation. Additionally, Chinese criminal networks launder billions in cartel profits through U.S. financial systems, with $33 billion in cash deposits and $13.8 billion through Chinese students’ accounts flagged between 2020 and 2024. While Chinese officials claim fentanyl is a “U.S. problem” and point to their efforts to curb direct shipments since 2019, the continued flow of precursors suggests at least tacit complicity.
Internally, the crisis is exacerbated by policies that critics argue normalize or enable addiction. In progressive strongholds, harm reduction strategies—such as safe injection sites in San Francisco or decriminalization of small drug quantities under California’s Proposition 47—have been accused of tolerating addiction rather than addressing it. In Philadelphia’s Kensington, open-air drug markets operate with minimal enforcement, as some policymakers frame addiction as a matter of personal freedom or social justice. These policies create a feedback loop: a “drugged” population, disconnected from reality, is less capable of demanding accountability or recognizing external threats.
This aligns with the parasitic metaphor: fentanyl acts as a literal drug that numbs the host, impairing its cognitive and social functions. By weakening the workforce, fracturing communities, and fostering dependency, it ensures the host remains vulnerable, unable to resist the parasite’s growing influence.
The parasite’s success depends on its ability to go unnoticed, and in the U.S., internal divisions serve as its greatest ally. The nation is more polarized than ever, with 80% of Americans viewing their society as deeply divided, according to Pew Research (2020). Trust in institutions—government, media, corporations—has plummeted, with only 39% of Americans expressing extreme pride in their national identity, a historic low (Gallup, 2023). This fragmentation is amplified by cultural debates that invert traditional values: merit, unity, and national pride are sometimes labeled as problematic, while divisive or self-destructive behaviors are framed as virtuous.
This erosion is not purely organic. External actors, including China, have been documented amplifying U.S. divisions through disinformation campaigns on social media, exploiting issues like race, gender, and political ideology to sow discord. For example, a 2018 report by the Senate Intelligence Committee revealed foreign influence operations targeting U.S. elections, with China and Russia using social media to exacerbate polarization. Meanwhile, internal actors—politicians, media, and corporations—have adopted frameworks like DEI or permissive drug policies that, while well-intentioned, often divert attention from strategic priorities like technological sovereignty or national security.
The parasite thrives in this environment. A divided, distracted, and “drugged” society is less capable of mounting a unified response to external threats. The normalization of addiction, the erosion of national pride, and the amplification of internal conflicts all serve to keep the host in a state of cognitive and social paralysis, allowing the parasite to continue its consumption.
The question of whether external enemies like China have “bought” political and media will—implicitly or explicitly—is contentious but critical. While direct evidence of widespread corruption is limited, several factors suggest influence:
Economic Leverage: China’s economic power gives it leverage over U.S. corporations and, indirectly, politicians. Apple, for instance, relies on China for 90% of its supply chain and a significant portion of its revenue. This creates pressure to avoid antagonizing Beijing, as seen in Apple’s compliance with Chinese censorship demands (e.g., removing VPN apps from its App Store in China). Corporate lobbying further influences U.S. policy. Tech giants, including Apple, spent $70 million on lobbying in 2024, often advocating for policies that preserve access to Chinese markets over national security concerns.
Political Inaction: The slow response to the fentanyl crisis suggests a lack of political will. Despite China’s role in precursor supply, U.S.-China trade negotiations rarely prioritize this issue. Some argue this reflects China’s influence over U.S. elites, who benefit from economic ties. The Biden administration’s focus on diplomacy with China has been criticized for downplaying the fentanyl crisis to avoid derailing trade talks. Permissive drug policies in progressive cities may not be directly “bought” by China, but they align with a broader narrative of tolerance that weakens societal resilience, indirectly serving the parasite’s goals.
Media Complicity: Mainstream media often frame the fentanyl crisis as a domestic public health issue, downplaying China’s role. This aligns with narratives pushed by Chinese officials, who deflect responsibility. Corporate media, dependent on advertising from globalized companies, may avoid hard-hitting coverage of China’s influence to protect business interests. For example, major outlets rarely connect the fentanyl crisis to geopolitical strategy, despite evidence of Chinese money laundering networks.
While explicit “buying” of politicians or media is hard to prove without whistleblower evidence, the implicit alignment of economic and political interests creates a permissive environment. The parasite doesn’t need to bribe directly; it thrives by exploiting the host’s greed, distraction, and division.
There is a clear precedent showing how the United States can align industry, technology, and capital with national security objectives: the shale revolution. After the 2008 financial crisis and in the midst of instability in the Middle East and Venezuela, the nation made the strategic decision to bet on fracking and unconventional resources.
The result was transformative: by 2019 the U.S. became the world’s largest oil and gas producer and achieved net energy independence for the first time in decades (EIA 2019). This reduced vulnerability to hostile or unstable suppliers and gave the U.S. a critical geopolitical margin against rivals.
But this success was also attacked. Political and cultural agendas — from legitimate environmental concerns to ideological campaigns under banners of DEI or “green transition” — sought to undermine shale. That these pressures concentrate on one of the few recent strategic successes is not coincidental: the parasite identifies where the host retains defenses and tries to neutralize them.
The shale case proves that when it chooses to, the U.S. can realign industrial priorities with security imperatives. That precedent must guide the current strategy.
The parasite requires nutrient flows. In this case: money. FinCEN and the Treasury have documented laundering schemes that allow cartels and brokers to recycle tens to hundreds of billions of dollars through the U.S. financial system (FinCEN 2024; Treasury 2023).
China- and Mexico-linked networks provide infrastructure to convert drug dollars into clean capital, fueling new rounds of production, corruption, and influence. Not every actor is state-directed, but the systemic outcome is identical: erosion of U.S. financial sovereignty and loss of control over domestic capital flows.
While external vectors advance, internal responses fragment. Harm reduction policies (naloxone, supervised sites, clean syringes) show partial effects (NIDA 2023; RAND 2024), but fail to reverse the crisis. Political focus centers on managing symptoms while ignoring the parasitic strategy behind them.
At the same time, foreign capital and ideological funding infiltrate U.S. academia. Qatar alone has donated between US$4.7 billion (2001–2021) and US$6.6 billion since 1981, often with little transparency about how the funds are used (tikva.international, israelhayom.com). Universities like Cornell, Carnegie Mellon, Georgetown, Texas A&M, and Northwestern established Doha campuses through Education City, each backed by $600M–1.8B (freedompress.com).
Academic research links this foreign Section 117 funding to erosion of liberal norms, pressure campaigns against scholars, and increased antisemitic incidents (up to 300% more than peer institutions) (frontiersin.org, washingtontimes.com).
Alongside Gulf state funding, NGOs such as the Open Society Foundations deploy billions globally to promote “democracy, justice, and rights” programs (influencewatch.org). These often target social sciences and activist-oriented disciplines at the expense of technical training, reinforcing ideological dependence and weakening industrial competitiveness. Critics argue that OSF-backed agendas accelerate internal polarization and dilute the nation’s strategic capabilities.
The result: engineering and applied sciences shrink while ideological disciplines expand. Graduates without competitive skills become politically dependent clients of the system. The parasite gains by steering intellectual formation away from productive resilience and toward dependency and division.
The final question is whether democracy itself is in crisis and being weaponized by adversaries. The evidence suggests a troubling reality. The very openness of democratic systems—free speech, elections, and a free press—makes them susceptible to manipulation. Foreign actors like China and Russia have exploited these vulnerabilities through disinformation campaigns that amplify divisive issues and weaken social cohesion. The 2018 Senate Intelligence Committee report documented such efforts in U.S. elections, and similar tactics continue today.
At the same time, democracy depends on an informed and cohesive electorate. Yet the fentanyl crisis, cultural division, and the erosion of national pride have undermined this foundation. A society that is drugged, fragmented, and cynical is more likely to reward short-term populism or permissive policies, perpetuating a cycle of vulnerability.
Adversaries like China do not need to destroy democracy directly; they can simply exploit its openness to sow chaos. By flooding the U.S. with fentanyl precursors or amplifying divisive narratives, they weaken the host without firing a shot. The economic leverage held by companies such as Apple, whose survival depends on China, further complicates democratic accountability, as corporate interests often outweigh national priorities.
Democracy is indeed in crisis, but not irreversibly so. The crisis stems from internal fragmentation and external exploitation, not from democracy itself. The shale revolution demonstrated that democratic societies are capable of rallying around shared goals when the threat is clear. Survival now demands the same clarity: a renewed sense of unity that rejects divisive ideologies, stronger protections for elections and media against foreign interference, and a realignment of corporate behavior with national sovereignty. Only by reclaiming cohesion and purpose can democracy resist being turned into a tool of its enemies.
The pattern is unmistakable. Over the past decades, the United States has hollowed out its own industrial base, transferring capabilities to rivals and financing their rise. Social cohesion has fractured under polarization, cultural division, and the normalization of addiction, leaving the nation drugged and distracted. Financial sovereignty has eroded as laundering networks recycle billions through its institutions, while foreign capital and ideological NGOs have infiltrated academia, steering education away from resilience and toward dependency. Even democracy itself has become a vector of exploitation, as adversaries weaponize its openness to amplify division and paralysis.
Yet history shows that the United States can mobilize when it frames these issues as matters of survival. The shale revolution proved that aligning industry and national will can restore sovereignty and resilience in the face of external threats. The challenge now is far greater. It is not only about energy but about rebuilding an industrial core, shielding financial flows, disrupting the narcotics vector, and restoring pride in shared values that bind the nation together.
The temptation to relocate production from China to other proxies such as India or Vietnam risks repeating the same strategic error that created Beijing’s rise. Just as Apple’s transfer of know-how helped spawn Huawei and Xiaomi, similar outsourcing could enable future rivals by mid-century. Sovereignty requires repatriation, not substitution. Critical technologies—from semiconductors to artificial intelligence and pharmaceuticals—must return to American soil if the nation is to regain true independence.
To awaken the host is to recognize that these are not isolated problems but a parasitic war strategy that combines dependence, numbing, erosion, and division into a single hostile campaign. The United States must act as if survival is at stake, because it is. That means disrupting the fentanyl supply chain through aggressive countermeasures, shielding financial systems from hostile laundering, and restoring democratic resilience by protecting elections and media from manipulation. Above all, it requires rebuilding a national narrative that rejects divisive ideologies and reclaims pride in unity and purpose.
The host is weakened, but not yet a cadaver. The parasite has thrived in complacency and distraction; it can be starved only by decisive, integrated action. The time to awaken is now, before the nation loses the will—or the capacity—to defend itself.
Reuters (2024). Apple’s China dependence under scrutiny.
Nikkei Asia (2023). Apple Supplier List Analysis.
U.S. Energy Information Administration (2019). The United States becomes a net exporter of petroleum.
CDC (2024). Provisional Drug Overdose Death Counts.
San Francisco OCME (2024). Overdose Deaths Annual Report.
Philadelphia Department of Public Health (2024). Substance Use Data.
Illinois Department of Public Health (2023). Drug Overdose Statistics.
DOJ (2023, 2024). Press Releases on Fentanyl Trafficking.
FinCEN (2024). Advisory on Illicit Finance Risks.
Treasury Department (2023). National Illicit Finance Strategy.
NIDA (2023). Harm Reduction Approaches.
RAND Corporation (2024). Evaluating Harm Reduction.
China.org.cn (2017). Tim Cook remarks at Fortune Global Forum.
AppleInsider (2017). Cook on Chinese supply chain and engineering talent.
McGee, P. (2025). Apple in China: The capture of the world’s greatest company. Financial Times.
Chan, K. (2023). China’s industrial strategy and technology transfer. Princeton University.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2024). Drug overdose deaths in the United States, 2024.
U.S. Government Accountability Office. (2025). Fentanyl continues to be the leading cause of overdose deaths.
NBC4 WCMH-TV. (2025, September 3). Ohioans, Chinese companies indicted for alleged roles in fentanyl trafficking.
CNN. (2025). The deadly drug that’s complicating US-China trade.
Pew Research Center. (2020). America’s divisions in 2020.
Gallup. (2023). National pride at historic low.
Senate Intelligence Committee. (2018). Russian and Chinese influence operations in U.S. elections.
Prepared by John Ramírez, Independent Researcher & Strategic Analyst, specializing in Data, Governance, and National Security Strategy. Draft version prepared in the style of Chatham House publications. In review – September 2025.
© Chatham House, The Royal Institute of International Affairs, 2025