This is in response to Shadow State’s Raniere & Crowley Were Much Alike.
Yes, Aleister Crowley and Raniere are alike insofar as both are (were) nuts.
They’re both examples of a nasty human being.
But that’s pretty much where the similarity ends. Crowley was an occultist, bisexual, a world wanderer, and a prolific author. He wrote poetry and fiction as well as his loony occult visions. He rubbed shoulders with painters, sculptors, and writers in Paris, London, and Berlin.
He lived in North Africa and the Far East. He bought an estate in Scotland, wore the kilt and passed himself off as a Scottish Laird. He considered himself a gentleman and did not believe in getting paid for teaching the mysteries of the occult.
Keith Raniere is the exact opposite. His “technology” is very much for sale. He wouldn’t know the arts if they bit him on the ass, and preferred to remain glued to the environs of upstate New York, living in a tacky suburban development in Nowheresville, NY.
Crowley was an asshole, but he was an asshole with good taste and wide-ranging interests. He ran through his fortune by the time he was forty, traveled the world, scaled mountains, and had a grand time. He inspired a Somerset Maugham novel, The Magician.
Crowley is interesting.
Raniere is not. He’s a money-grubbing little man whose vision of the good life never went beyond sleeping most of the day, eating pizza, and getting laid. He’s mercenary. He loves money but doesn’t know what to do with it, other than lose it in bad investments.
See the world? Nah, he’d rather sprawl on a dirty couch and watch reruns of Star Trek.
The man led the most uninteresting life imaginable – and the most remarkable thing about him is that he managed to screw up so spectacularly.
Hannah Arendt famously wrote of “the banality of evil”.
Raniere would be the perfect contemporary illustration of the concept except I can’t elevate his tawdry nastiness to the level of evil.
I’m no defender of Aleister Crowley. He hit his wife and sacrificed small animals. The only reason I have posted about him is in response to other posts. Just to correct the record.
In the popular imagination, Crowley is this great evil, a Satanist and the opponent of all that is good and holy. In fact, he was not a Satanist, he was a Pagan. And yes, there is a difference. The son of fanatically religious parents, he rebelled against the restrictive Victorian moralism of his youth. He was gay in both senses of the word.
He was an interesting eccentric whereas Keith Raniere is a surpassingly dull felon. Raniere is perhaps the least interesting racketeer in the history of racketeering. He ruined lives and burned through others’ money for nothing, not even for the sake of a grandiose lifestyle for himself.
The man is literally a waste of space.
Extraordinary Claims Demand Extraordinary Proof
This is in response to Fred’s J. Z. Knight Stole Her Bogus Ramtha Act
Both Jane Robert’s claim of channeling “Seth” and J.Z. Knight’s claim of channeling Ramtha are claims with no proof.
None of this is any more likely than leprechauns or unicorns, so believe in it if if you like, just don’t pretend you’re presenting any kind of rational argument.
Channeling, like reincarnation, is an old idea with deep roots in mankind’s superstitious past. People were justified in believing this stuff back when nobody knew where the sun went at night. Belief in spirits and goblins is a little harder to stomach in the 21st century.
Anyone can get up on a stage and pretend to “channel” some ancient spirit. There are two tacks to take: either come up with whatever nonsense you like (nobody can prove it either way) or do some historical research first so you sound like you were “there” (in which case there’s no way to know whether you lived it or read about it like everyone else).
Oh good. Another off-topic diatribe from our resident atheist-in-satanist’s-clothing. These “articles” baaaarely touch on Raniere, and read more like polemics.
@ Actaeon: “Never argue with an idiot. They will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience”.
God Help Us 😉 if Crowley was born during the time of the internet, access to the mind-controlled media, and an iPhone.. He’d probably have his iPhone stuck to his hand. Just sayin’…
Vangone has one characteristic that he doesn’t share with either Crowley or Rasputin.
Vangone is a coward.
He shares that with Manson. Manson hid in a bathroom cupboard when the feds arrived, and Vangone hid in a closet.
Crowley and Rasputin were actually quite tough individuals.
You big old boys and your obsession with murderous bores.
One can draw conclusions about similarities and differences between Raniere and many other characters, but there is little point to it. For me, the Crowley/Raniere comparison exercise is meaningless, as Crowley was into the fake spiritual world whereas Raniere was fully into the fake logical world, which means they were into quite different fake worlds. So what? Trump vs. the Fake News is much more interesting to me.
If you page through past articles about Raniere in the Frank Report you will find him compared to the infamous serial killer H.H. Holmes and Rasputin, Russia’s Mad Monk.
Reader compares Raniere and sociopath killer H. H. Holmes
Love Cult of Raniere not new; a comment on Raniere’s harem
Others have compared Raniere to the Baghwan Sree Rajneesh of the OSHO cult.
Still, others draw parallels between Raniere to the Mormon Polygamists Joseph Smith and Warren Jeffs.
Some observers note that Raniere and Crowley were both amoral individuals
Others note similarities between Raniere and David Koresh and Charles Manson.
Shivani: A Great Similarity Between Keith Raniere and Charles Manson
One of my favorite Professors in college, a man named Nunzio Pernicone, liked to say “There is Nothing New Under the Sun.”
Professor Pernicone was right.
Ranieres have appeared in the past and will reappear in the future.
Cults have and always will have great appeal to people who are spiritually and intellectually empty inside.
People who have no inner moral compass.
And NXIVM had many wealthy women with lots of time on their hands and no sense of right and wrong.
Combine that with low self-esteem and lack of education and you have a recipe for disaster.
There are lots of young women who work hard raising their families and earning a living.
Other young women are hard at work studying in college to build a good future life for themselves and their spouses and children.
These women don’t have the time or money to donate to a lazy ignorant charlatan.