Okay, we all already know that the American regime—and the British, the German, the . . . well, you get the idea: pretty much the entire West, and the rest of the world for that matter—is parasitic in nature; that goes without saying, and I would not wish to insult the TBP denizens’ intelligence by acting like that is news to them. Rather, what I wish to do here is craft a more detailed picture of the ways the various parts of the regime interact with each other and with us and then, in a subsequent essay, elaborate on the ways that the regime might be overcome without violence—which is always more satisfying but does leave the keyboard warriors vulnerable to the wrath of the military (which like IDF might be piss-poor at defeating Iran but is highly skilled at killing civilians)—and without anything illegal.
For now, then, let’s stick to the regime and its nature: in the smallest number of words, it’s a de facto parasitic superorganism. To understand what I mean by this, let’s first review what the term means in biology, where superorganism refers to a living organism that functions via heterogeneous parts working together to sustain it, e.g., a colony of ants or a cancerous tumor, characterized by these varied parts’ inability to sustain themselves without the others.
Human civilizations may be seen as superorganisms, with some of them being—and there are gradations and gray areas here—imbued with parasitic elements. While some societies are closer to a colony of ants in their nature (nonparasitic, at least internally, and cooperative), others are far closer to a human body riddled with cancerous tumors. As I am writing in my (as yet unpublished) book The March of the Fallen:
If a nation is a spiritually and morally healthy one, the superorganism is simply the nation as a whole, with all of its subparts kept in beneficial balance and mutually supporting each other. But if the nation allows its spiritual and moral health to decline, certain elites will take the opportunity to mold themselves and the institutions they control or can take control of into a parasitic superorganism, or a superorganism that uses parasitism of groups and institutions outside of itself to increase its wealth and/or power to levels beyond those that it could command through voluntary production and exchange or through a semi-voluntary political arrangement (i.e., one that not everyone gives his explicit consent to, but at least most do and have the details known through tradition or spelled out in the manner of a constitution which the political classes then abide by)—which in the case a political one means battening itself and increasing its power at the expense of the rest of the nation and/or, in the case of an imperialist one, other nations.
In the case of a weakened nation, then, the government is a regime or parasitic superorgansim that at once has a parasitic/antagonistic relationship with the host population at large and a cooperative relationship among its various parts, all of which instinctively (or with a little nudging from the elites who dominate those parts or the whole) work together and defend each other from what they perceive to be threats to their interests. As far as the American regime goes, here is (again, from March of the Fallen) a summary of its various parts and their relationships with each other:
The political institutions proper. These are the governments and bureaucracies at all levels of the state—in our case, from the federal government, down to the state, down to the local—some of which are elected, some appointed, all of which provide the veneer of legitimacy for the entire regime and focus attention away from its other parts that are often more powerful than the ostensible governing institutions. In return for giving cover to the other parts, the individuals who make up the nominal governing classes will (assuming they are not one of those rare pols who really displease, either intentionally or through incompetence, the other elites composing the regime) find their rewards within the regime as a whole upon stepping down from their post, if not long before that point.
The mainstream media (MSM). The informational gatekeepers whose task is to mold, as much as possible, the thoughts (using the term loosely) of the majority of the population through dissemination of the ideologies and supporting narratives, to the point that those who would stand in opposition to the regime’s lies feel hopelessly isolated at best and insane at worst. This allows the MSM to utilize a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy: if they can get most individuals to think that most people overall believe the official line on anything, then the portion of the population susceptible to a herd mentality (that number being, likely, somewhere north of half of it) will either begin to believe it themselves or will, at the very least, parrot it as if they believe it; they will likely also turn on those who express scorn or doubt of the official narratives out loud, allowing an effective micro-level policing at relatively little cost.
The MSM, in turn, gets much of its funding from regime friendly businesses and much of its legitimacy from both how its narratives match those of the school system and how the respectable politicians of both parties are terrified of going against its most sacred narratives: there’s always an Overton window’s worth of disagreement—couldn’t keep the illusion of choice going without it—but such debates never touch on the narratives and portions of the regime’s ideology that it uses to defend its entrenched interests. As the parasitic regime grows relative the country as a whole, so do the acceptable lines of thought shrink: the result of more egomaniacs needing to feel confident in their power and protect their egos and interests; more parts of the culture and economy needing to defend their indefensible activities from criticism; and more of those outside of the regime feeling pain from its parasitism needing to be suppressed if control is to be maintained.
The Hollywood/entertainment/sports complex. The means by which official ideologies and narratives are made to permeate the culture at large. Its task is to ensure that a high a percentage of the things which make us laugh, cry, feel outraged, or be entertained are imbued with the values (or anti-values) that the regime finds most helpful at the time; that many or even most public figures whom the masses would be likely to admire and emulate either push the official narratives or at least don’t question them. This amusement/diversion complex also lionizes or demonizes those who are, respectively, in conformity with the regime’s goals explicitly or who serve as its controlled opposition (those who truly oppose it being ignored as much as possible, though if they somehow manage to rise to prominence they will be demonized even more fiercely than the regime’s phony opponents).
The political establishment, in turn, is sure to give those in the complex as much special legislation as they think they can without attracting too much attention to their cozy relationship. And, of course, they partner with the regime-connected businessmen in whatever ventures are to the benefit of both—ventures, we might add, greatly aided by having connections to a central bank capable of creating money out of thin air.
The “education” system, from grade schools to colleges. More properly called the indoctrination complex, its task on behalf of the regime is to add a vicious twist to the old adage (attributed to the Jesuits but going back to at least Aristotle) “Give me a child until the age of seven and I will give you the man,” so that it might be rephrased as, “Give us a child for grade school and we’ll give you a loyal manservant/womanservant/nonbinary servant of the regime” (that assuming, of course, that he/she/it doesn’t transition and kill himself/herself/itself shortly after). It is a narrative factory and distribution network, one designed to take hold of as many minds as it can much earlier than the MSM proper, and it works in tandem with the makers of entertainment and popular culture to ensure that the official history makes it to the masses. Its job is to truly cripple critical thinking abilities in those who possess them, while substituting instinctive clucking based on official stances plucked from memory for direct use of one’s frontal lobes.
Woke or crony capital. The parts of the economy (quite substantial portions at that) under the control of either those who seek to actively push some kind of ideology which the regime finds helpful or those who seek to use the regime to gain an advantage over their competitors. Either way, those regime friendly businessmen and women do an invaluable service for the parasitic elites by giving them what is currently—and will remain until the elites find a way to legalize European-style hate crime legislation and so can jail those who oppose the state’s ideology and narrative—the most brutal form of punishment for badthink: job loss, loss of payment services, and/or denial of loans, which usually gets both common people and elite figureheads to at least pretend to believe the official lies even more effectively than does social ostracism. And, again, these crazy and/or crony capitalists gain much of their power and wealth via their connections with the Fed and other parts of the crony banking system.
The Federal Reserve System. The beating heart of the parasite, it ensures that the money which serves as its lifeblood keeps flowing freely to those that support it—and also ensures that any businesses who might seem unfriendly toward the regime get far less access to funds. And by means of credit expansion (inflation by any other name), which increases the money supply overall and dilutes the purchasing power of the currency by the amount of increase, the system can clandestinely steal from the general population to give to those who toe the official line. The politicians might nominally appoint the heads of the Fed and its larger system, but those pols are at the mercy of all those who stand to benefit from the Fed’s control over the money supply. So while the various regime players might squabble over who gets how much, they all make sure to keep it in the family, so to speak.
The military industrial complex (MIC). The strong arm and sword of the regime, the one that has until very recently ensured that the dollar is king of world trade, perched on its lofty throne as the world’s reserve currency—and allowed the regime to export much of its inflation to foreign nations and thus avoid antagonizing its home population as much as it can. It is this combination of the MIC, Fed (when the dollar was the undisputed top dog of world commerce), and (as we’ll see below) the intelligence agencies, which allowed the American regime to parasitize on a truly imperial scale, stealing the wealth of ordinary men and women far beyond the country’s borders. It also, of course, parasitizes its own citizens via the crony government contractors who over the course of the period of American dominance or hegemony have grown fat and lazy over not having to produce weapons systems to fight a peer adversary.
Over that time, their M.O. has co-evolved with that of the useless political classes to maximize parasitism in the process of front-loading and political engineering whereby contractors overpromise and under deliver but are never held accountable because the lucre is spread across many congressional districts. The system rewards corruption and inefficiency, and the result is insanely bloated military budgets that produce less bang for the buck. Were the military spending for true defense only, even half of that budged would suffice; the rest feeds the bottomless money-sucking appetite of the global American empire (GAE) which feels the need to maintain American and Israeli dominance on the global stage. Given the scope and scale of the GAE and the inefficiency of its MIC, it should surprise none that many companies not directly involved with supplying the armed forces get caught up in the MIC’s web and therefore come to support its parasitism.
It, in turn keeps the dollar as utilized in the world as the threat of force can. All things military, in turn, are more or less protected by Hollywood and glamorized/lionized in downstream popular culture—yes, sometimes military individuals are demonized as part of the plot, but the military itself is never portrayed as a source of parasitic corruption.
The intelligence agencies (FBI, CIA, etc.). The silent, assassin’s blade of the elites, one whose strikes might be said to cut even deeper and cause more damage than the blatant activities of the military. By ensuring that the leaders of nations too small and weak to threaten the US with massive retaliation for attempted regime change are either kept on friendly terms with the US or are killed or otherwise replaced by those who will prove cooperative, agencies like the CIA obtain maximum American influence at (relatively) minimal cost, both in dollar terms and in terms of respectability within the international community.
Not that such activities are limited to the regime’s foreign enemies: the FBI and other internal intelligence agencies have proven themselves invaluable over the years to the regime as they’ve engaged in any number of false flags, assassinations, and other illegal tactics designed to silence or force compliancy on the enemies of the parasitic superorganism. They, in turn are almost universally lionized by the media and the Hollywood/entertainment complex and, beyond that, many from their ranks are able to secure lucrative jobs as MSM employees or MIC supplier board members.
The Jewish superorganism/Israel. This part is actually a distinct parasitic superorganism in its own right, transnational in scope and globalist in nature. Of course, not all Jews are part of the Jewish superorganism and not all of the American regime (and the same goes for the European regimes, as well as the other ones that the Jewish superorganism has strong influence within) is Jewish, but the extent to which Jews overall both support and benefit from their superorganism as well as the influence that that parasite has within the American regime make it perfectly rational to talk of our regime being composed of two parts, a Jewish and a non-Jewish one. One way of looking at it is as different pathogenic bacteria living in symbiotic harmony within the same biofilm that protects them from the wrath of the body’s immune system.
Another way would be to look at the parts of the regime as if they formed the superorganism of a body, the body of a predatory animal. The Jews, with their very high average IQ and their tight, interconnected systems of ethnic networking, form much of the brain and central nervous system of the beast, while the non-Jewish parts make up part of the nervous system and most of the skeleton and musculature. The beating heart is the Fed, which keeps the lifeblood of money flowing to the various parts, keeping them strong. Staying with the metaphor, the Jews are found in commanding positions within the various parts of the regime and their influence permeates every part of it to various degrees.
They are the creators and/or promoters of virtually all the ideologies which the American regime uses to weaken the population and/or justify protecting its interests. The cult of victimhood which permeates and strangulates our entire culture began with Jews—even before the Holocaust, which even now remains the Jewish superorganism’s greatest tool and most influential manifestation—and had Jews at the forefront of every last part of its expansion to blacks and other minorities, sexual deviants, women, people too mentally and physiologically ill to know what gender they are, etc. However, as Christians we must seek the truth of matters no matter where doing so leads us, even if it leads to the conclusion that the American regime, or any other having a Jewish element (with the possible exception of the Israeli governing elites: given that Israel as a whole is a parasite of the West in general and America in particular, and given what the Gaza War has revealed about the attitudes of ordinary Israelis it is entirely possible that all of Israel—and its sayanim abroad—constitute a superorganism with little to no internal parasitism) is definitely not just an appendage of the Jewish superorganism but a superorganism in its own right: the non-Jewish elites are at least every bit as responsible for the plight of their peoples as the Jews are and probably much more so, since if they were true Christians they could and would as one turn on the Jews and end the parasitism then and there. The statement that the elite Jews (and many if not most of the non-elite ones, at least those sharing their temperament) are like demons is both true and truly damning with regard to the white elites: demons have no more power than mortal men let them have; if the West as a whole were to turn back to God and truly embrace true Christian principles and behavior the Jews’ power would melt away like snow at the end of a long, cold, and dark winter.
This bring us to the issue of the seeming oppositional or antagonistic parts of the regime (Dem vs Repub, Musk vs the more blatantly liberal oligarchs, etc.) and their relationships with each other: is it all Kabuki or genuine? Well . . . a little of both actually. Even in nature it is true that within parasitic superorganisms there is found not an entire dearth of competition and some degree of antagonism: just as the cells in a tumor mutate constantly, giving some a competitive advantage over others that the superior cells can then displace, taking the lesser cells; parasitic gains for themselves, so there is some genuine (if mostly limited and restrained) rivalry between and within the various parts of the regime. To understand how this works we need to understand the nature of intrainstitutional competition.
In any institution, no matter how united it might be, there is some degree of competition between its members: members of a team compete for glory and ranking, members of a business compete for promotions, raises and so forth; sometimes the competition is more or less friendly and honorable, while at other times (probably the more common outcome) it is as fierce as it can be without actual violence, with bitter rivalries, intrigue, backstabbing, etc., all par for the course. And although it might seem chaotic, it inevitably follows certain knowable patterns that hold for every institution no matter their time and place. I’ve described how this works in a part of March of the Fallen:
To understand such competition, we must first understand that within groups of any size and kind there are laws that govern the interactions between members of the group: some of these are formal and written; others are purely cultural and only implicit. In either case, there are basically three aspects to the laws: 1) what is expected of members of the groups that the laws demarcate; 2) what is forbidden to them, or most of them anyway (sometimes the elites form a parasitic subculture which violates this); and 3) what is permitted but not required, which is usually all the rest except for some gray areas.
When combined with the immutable laws of the physical world, these largely determine one’s power (which we define as the ability to make, halt, or undo changes in the external or inner world)—with accidents or circumstances, which can make unusual (and usually temporary) changes in or exceptions to those rules, forming the remainder of what determines it.
. . .
In some instances, of course, formal and cultural are more or less the same, or at least not contradictory, while in other instances parts of one type outright contradict parts of the other. Which will be the case can vary, but in general it might be said to depend on whether the subculture of the institution or parts within it matches or doesn’t match the culture of the larger entity, be it the institution as a whole or a state or nation that it resides within: in any time and place, and level of governing rules, only formal laws that more or less match the cultural ones will be voluntarily obeyed, while those that run contrary to those cultural laws will be ignored and skirted as much as it practicable; hence, because most of the formal laws of an institution must be in conformity with the formal laws of the political entity in which it resides, that institution’s cultural laws will only match its formal ones if a) the cultures or subculture within the institution match the larger culture of the world around that institution, and b) that larger society’s formal laws match its cultural ones.
Any mismatch between formal and cultural is usually a sign of parasitism of one kind or another at some level. This is not necessarily the direct result of regime parasitism or other top-down parasitism, but usually involves it at least indirectly. For example, a bunch of Haitians working in a hospital who try to steal as many medical supplies as they think they can without being caught in order to have extra money for themselves and their immediate families are following the cultural laws from their homelands (those nations made up mostly of pure sub-Saharan Africans, which have the same Machiavellian tribal mentality underlying them): this alien subculture within the larger institutional culture of the hospital is an example of parasitism from below, and is not directly the result of the parasitic regime; however, the presence of large numbers of such aliens is virtually always the result of the regime’s actions and so is indirectly attributable to them.
Most of the time, however, the mismatch is the result of parasitism from above; that is, a group of parasitic elites attempting to impose their will on the population at large at least partially via either formal laws that fly in the face of cultural ones or cultural ones that hold great sway within the institutions of the regime (often those tied to rule of the population, such as the courts, police, or military) but that fly in the face of both the written and unwritten laws dominant within the broader society.
However, it is important to remember that subversion of laws of various kinds is not limited to elite parasites (at least not as a type of behavior—degree is another matter), but is ubiquitous throughout society as a whole, as I explain:
Human cooperation and competition is a paradox—and, no, that’s not a subject-verb disagreement, but a somewhat ungrammatical means of conveying an essential truth: in the fallen world, cooperation and competition are so interwoven and tangled together that it’s often impossible to know where one ends and the other begins. On the one hand, all those who want to see the groups that make civilization possible (especially an advanced one) maintained—especially the leader whose exercise of power depends on the maintenance of an order of sorts—must enforce some type of rules, lest they face the chaos that will result from a breakdown of all order within the system; only those who seek power at the expense of the group may like chaos, if they think it will help them. The worst regime that ever existed wanted at least its unwritten rules enforced, while all but the most suicidally nihilistic rebel will want to avoid chaos that confers no personal advantage for their own ambitions.
On the other hand, there is a constant tendency for men to seek out ways to slightly flout or slightly stretch the rules for their own advantage: even the normally conscientious are at time inclined to work outside of the normal bounds a bit; and even among the more ambitious and less conscientious there is a simultaneous inclination to see the rules stretched and see them maintained (the former for their own advantage, the latter to prevent their rivals from doing the same). Thus there is always within institutions a constant (but usually low-level) jockeying for power, prominence, and rewards, and so the question always is what stretching of what rules would be moral and/or practical? The morality issue is the main concern for ordinary men, while the stretching possibility is uppermost in the minds of the kinds of men who form regimes at various levels of power—for until the time of extremely advanced robots is upon us, there is no such thing as a one-man regime, and even parasites must take heed of the feelings of their peers and to a lesser extent those of their host society as well.
So at any point in time at any level of power, you have pretty much all seeking to gain for themselves as much as their conscience and those they think able to stop them will allow. And for those with an inclination to stretch at least some rules to at least some degree, usually this means stretching them juuussst enough to gain an advantage but not enough to provoke a reaction among those in a position to punish, directly or indirectly, for doing so.
. . .
Often these cultural rules have an in-group/out-group aspect to them: that is, they alter based on whether the competition and/or interactions is strictly within the group in isolation or within the group during a period of contact with another group—at which times competition within the group itself may decrease, cease, intensify, or otherwise substantially alter in some way in light of the nature of the relationship between the group and the one it is suddenly in contact with. If the two groups are rivals, it might be the case that all competition within the first group ceases and a new set of cultural rules comes into play, one designed for an all-hands-on-deck approach that suddenly penalizes the kind of infighting and competition that had been endemic to the group up to the moments before its interaction with the rival one.
One of the finest literary depictions of this comes from a Father Brown story by G. K. Chesterton, “The Queer Feet,” which centers on a meeting of the British elites at a yearly club dinner in a fancy hotel owned by a Jew:
The talk was that strange, slight talk which governs the British Empire, which governs it in secret, and yet would scarcely enlighten an ordinary Englishman even if he could overhear it. Cabinet members on both sides were alluded to by their Christian names with a sort of bored benignity. The Radical Chancellor of the Exchequer, whom the whole Tory party was supposed to be cursing for his extortions, was praised for his minor poetry, or his saddle in the hunting field. The Tory leader, whom all the liberals were supposed to hate as a tyrant, was discussed and, on the whole, praised—as a liberal. It seemed somehow that politicians were very important. And yet, anything seemed important about them except their politics. Mr. Audley, the chairman, was an amiable, elderly man who still wore Gladstone collars; he was a kind of symbol of all that phantasmal and yet fixed society. He had never done anything—not even anything wrong. He was not fast; he was not even particularly rich. He was simply in the thing; and there was an end to it. No party could ignore him, and if he had wished to be in the Cabinet he certainly would have been put there. The Duke of Chester, the vice-president, was a young rising politician. That is to say, he was a pleasant youth, with flat, fair hair and a freckled face, with moderate intelligence and enormous estates. In public, his appearances were always successful and his principles was simple enough. When he thought of a joke he made it and was called brilliant. When he could not think of a joke he said that this was no time for trifling and was called able. In private, in a club of his own class, he was simply quite pleasantly frank and silly, like a schoolboy. Mr. Audley, never having been in politics, treated them a little more seriously. Sometimes he even embarrassed the company by phrases suggesting that there was some difference between a Liberal and a Conservative.
Thus the competition between our elites is both entirely genuine and entirely fake: it’s genuine with regard to the jockeying for power, prestige, and profit that plays out within the unwritten rules that govern intraelite competition, since they all respect each other enough to provide for themselves all the competition that is genuine and determinative (at least as far as it goes, which is not very) of the structure and control of the system that so enriches and empowers the competitors; on the other hand, it’s entirely phony with regard to the kinds of real changes that the host population has the greatest desire for and need of—i.e., changes to eliminate the regime’s parasitic nature.
Truly 100% Kabuki simply would be too hard to coordinate and appear even more fake than it does now—kind of like what was once said of sci-fi stories: although it might seem like the average stuff that you read is unbearably bad, it’s useful to remember that even worse stuff existed that simply never got published. Moreover, such a setup would be unsustainable, with too many potential whistleblowers feeling so much guilt from taking part in a completely, at every level, fake act that many of them would break and confess. But by keeping the competition real but within completely contrived (and ferociously enforced) boundaries, they can give it a real enough feel both for those within and without it to keep the illusion going at least semirealistically. It is, from the evolutionary standpoint of the parasite, the balance between real and fake best calculated to allow it to extract maximum resources from its host society.
So, with that in mind, how does one successfully challenge such an entity and win? Well, that’s the subject of my next essay.
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Leave a Reply