“Chapel Perilous, that vortex where cosmological speculations, coincidences, and paranoia seem to multiply and then collapse, compelling belief or lunacy, wisdom or agnosticism.” ~Robert Anton Wilson

    Viewing Alan Watt with post-Kealey Eyes

    Share

    Lucid Memes
    Red Belt
    Red Belt

    Number of posts: 1111
    Registration date: 2009-02-12
    Location: Here Be Dragons

    Viewing Alan Watt with post-Kealey Eyes

    Post by Lucid Memes on Sun Jan 03, 2010 11:33 am

    I don't think there's enough of this (the title) amongst Alan Watt fans and former fans...I don't think people have fully grasped the significance of the Kealey plagiarism revelation. The research and study groups that I've associated with over the past couple of years, have focused their attention on the concepts provided by Alan Watt...his website, books and his radio show. Watt presented openly and publicly, rather convincingly, that we're living in a matrix-like system driven by a "eugenics-obsessed" psychopathic elite. Most of Watt's public information was very straightforward, documented in books, and quoted by major key players in the power elite...

    But all Watt fans know, that Watt had a mysterious undercurrent to accompany his general theme. I would estimate that 90% of Watt's information was sourced/documented/quoted...but there was a 10% that was an unsourced and mysterious substructure to his thought that formed the foundation to the rest of the other 90%. And that mysterious foundation obscurely mention themes such as:
    - the system going back far into pre-history
    - he talked about androgynous agendas
    - a super secret core of troglodyte elites
    - a supernatural quality to Freemasonry
    - a strange etymological word code
    - and the future phasing out of humanity through orchestrated disasters
    etc...Watt always acted as if he was "saying too much" and would not talk about these foundational subjects in further detail

    And I think a lot of us trusted his judgment on the 90% and assumed that the other 10% was also well sourced like the majority of his work. But the problem was that he wasn't being open about it! He was vague as hell when it came to his foundations. I remember multiple times that I would email Watt, asking him for sources of his vague musings...but he never responded. He'd just continue on with his radio show, fear mongering his audience into buy his books and to listen to his show to find the answers to his mysteries (of which he was never going to reveal)...at least not willingly.

    I stopped listening to Watt's show for a few months after I realized it wasn't going anywhere. Then Nodoz came to me with information that Watt had actually plagiarized his books from some other Canadian author named Glen Kealey...and that Kealey was Watt's main (but hidden) inspiration. And it was quite a bombshell...because that mysterious 10% of Watt's vagueness was what Kealey talked about 100% of the time! So now we were finally revealed to the full story...and what an incredibly ludicrous story it turned out to be, lol Laughing ...you know, if Watt hadn't been so vague about it from the start, I probably would've never have given him any consideration. Watt was a guy who was so rational, that he'd continuously debunked outlandish conspiracy hosts, new age believers, and people who spouted alien theories...yet, the whole time he took seriously the thoughts of a person who believed in even more ridiculous claims than them! Yes, Kealey is worse than probably all the people that Watt debunked!

    Now, the reaction of Alan Watt fans is what I'm trying to get at. The fans were divided...most people dismissed Kealey and continued focusing on Watt's rational 90%...but there was a small few who decided to look into Kealey ideas more. And even most of this small few have come to the realization of how asinine and illogical Kealey is and have reverted back to Watt's rational 90% ...but my arguement is that there's really not much about Alan Watt's work to go back to.

    If Kealey's pre-history theories, and language scramble codes, and ancient genetic engineering theories, and androgynous agendas, and neanderthal elites, and 2012 doomsday scenarios are crazy...then why is it not crazy when Alan Watt talks about it, knowing that he stole those ideas from Kealey? It's almost as if Watt fans have turned a blind eye to the Kealey revelation. Even when you look at Watt's seemingly rational 90%, it's still irrationally based in Kealey's craziness. For example, the omnipotent power that Watt attributes to the elite are based in large by Kealey's theories of super Neanderthals with GE technology. There's also a religious Sufi element that Kealey reveled too.

    And forget about Kealey for a moment...Watt's rational 90% is largely in question regardless. I'd even argue a lot of the books that Watt quoted are no longer the even put to use by the elite. And even upon further investigation, the books he quotes are outdated, often contradictory to each other, often misquoted and taken out of context...yet he still quotes them as if they have relevance and so do his followers. Independent research has also led me to conclude that his historical analysis is grossly inaccurate...so all this, plus Kealey, plus the crypto-sufi beliefs...why does Alan Watt still have such a dedicated fan base?


    Last edited by Lucid Memes on Thu Apr 29, 2010 8:46 am; edited 1 time in total


    _________________
    [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
    link

    Extant
    Brown Belt
    Brown Belt

    Number of posts: 555
    Registration date: 2009-04-04
    Location: The Forge

    Re: Viewing Alan Watt with post-Kealey Eyes

    Post by Extant on Sun Jan 03, 2010 12:34 pm

    Lucid Memes wrote:And forget about Kealey for a moment...Watt's rational 90% is largely in question regardless. I'd even argue a lot of the books that Watt quoted are no longer the even put to use by the elite. And even upon further investigation, the books he quotes are outdated, often contradictory to each other, and often misquoted...yet he still quotes them as if they have relevance and so do his followers. Independent research has also led me to conclude that his historical analysis is grossly inaccurate...so all this, plus Kealey, plus the crypto-sufi beliefs...why does Alan Watt still have such a dedicated fan base?

    He's a skilled charlatan who has taken on the guise of an apocalyptic preacher. He's so in the tradition of the Judaeo-Christian doomsaying proselytiser it's unreal. And, of course, it works. You pull in a cult following of zealots who hang on your every word. When I first ever heard him on the radio a little voice sounded in my head saying: "He is weaving a story here, a tale of despair and fascination." I ignored the voice and carried on listening for some months and he sucked me in. Then all the shit hit the fan and the real Alan Watt came into view. Con-man and charlatan. Twisted Evil

    The "truth movement" is full of these micro-Millenarian cults.

    Lucid Memes
    Red Belt
    Red Belt

    Number of posts: 1111
    Registration date: 2009-02-12
    Location: Here Be Dragons

    Re: Viewing Alan Watt with post-Kealey Eyes

    Post by Lucid Memes on Sun Jan 03, 2010 3:16 pm

    lol yeah. I think it's kind of an ego thing with them, as if they somewhat feel that Alan Watt being debunked means that years of their studies means nothing now. I personally have no problem owning up to the truth of the matter, but I still feel that I've learned from the experience.

    My main point of contention against Watt started for me when I first heard him talk about demonic elites. There was times when it was difficult to discern if Watt was defending Catholicism or Gnosticism...both systems are contradictory...even some of his statements about a particular system was contradicting.

    For example, on Catholicism, I've heard him say that the closest the elite have ever come to total domination of the masses was during the Dark Ages when the Catholic church ruled over the illiterate masses. Then I later heard him say that the only remaining obstacle in the way of the NWO is the Catholic church...talk about mixed messages. scratch

    But again on the whole demonic elite thing...its a very anti-materialist gnostic concept he defends. Where as Theosophists believe in a creation story that says "good spirits incarnated into the material world to save it," Watt contends that those spirits were demonic and evil and only incarnated because they love material sensation. I knew he was a gnostic of sorts, but its more clear to me now that his avenue to gnosticism is via Sufism.

    Alan Watt was apparently able to hybridize gnostic Sufi memes with Kealey memes.

    Those 2 things are not difficult to fuse if you look at Kealey's sources. Something interesting to point out regarding this...remember that guy Stan Gooch? (featured here in this thread -> [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]). He postulated a theory that Neanderthal brains were heavily plagued by demonic hallucinations. He wrote a whole book dedicated to the subject, entitled "The Origins of Psychic Phenomena: Poltergeists, Incubi, Succubi, and the Unconscious Mind
    Product Description
    Examines unexplained phenomena in psychiatric and psychological terms rather than occult terms

    • Explores how the unconscious mind manifests paranormal phenomena

    • Shows how the cerebellum--the seat of the unconscious--is the source of these energies, subpersonalities, and manifestations

    • Identifies our neglected “Neanderthal” subconscious as responsible for the rising incidence of paranormal happenings

    Alien abduction, poltergeist attacks, incubi, succubi, split and multiple personalities, possessions, precognition, spontaneous combustion--the list of phenomena not just unexplained but ignored by mainstream science seems endless. Yet the key to the origin of all these manifestations lies deep within our own brains.

    In The Origins of Psychic Phenomena, Stan Gooch explores the functioning of the dream-producing part of the brain--the cerebellum--and how the unconscious mind is able to externalize itself. The cerebellum is the physical seat of the unconscious and was once equal to or even superior to the cerebrum as essential to our functioning. In modern times it has been shunted into the subliminal, yet the cerebellum continues to process our worldly experiences and reveals its concerns in misunderstood, often frightening, manifestations. Gooch explains that Neanderthal Man possessed a much larger cerebellum than Cro-Magnon Man and posits that the modern repression of the cerebellum’s role in our consciousness has given rise to these supernatural phenomena.

    That's right...Glen Kealey's crazy theory about the "Neanderthal part of the brain" that controls its human host, similar to demonic possession, was probably inspired by Stan Gooch's "Neanderthal brain cerebellum"...the part of the brain Gooch theorized to be the seat of demonic hallucinations! (i.e. possessions). These are things to ponder. Idea


    _________________
    [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
    link

    Extant
    Brown Belt
    Brown Belt

    Number of posts: 555
    Registration date: 2009-04-04
    Location: The Forge

    Re: Viewing Alan Watt with post-Kealey Eyes

    Post by Extant on Sun Jan 03, 2010 3:30 pm

    Some good points there. But I don't think Watt is a Sufi Gnostic. I think he's just a charlatan who floats his boat on both main streams of conspiratainment for maximum effect: the Christian Orthodox stream and the Gnostic Heretic stream. That's why you have the conflicting messages coming from him. I think he counts on the poor memory of some people who listen to him regularly, allied to the fact that he knows that the devoted disaffected demographic that listen to him will make allowances if they notice, but that the slightly schizophrenic portion of his "audience cult" listenership will actually make sense of these mixed messages, in true schizophrenic fashion. Twisted Evil
    The conflicting messages will also arise depending on who he's talking to. I've noticed that this will occur especially when he answers questions from a caller. Like the true con man he is he assess the caller's pre-disposition from the way the question is phrased and the content of the question. So many who call him up also "beg the question" (I did that a couple of times calling him up on the show) and Watt leads off from that. His whole persona is constructed to lead people to do this.

    It's all just a clever ruse for me as concerns Watt. The only point of contact we have for him going to visit the Sufis is Glen Kealey. Watt probably threw him a line there, even if he actually told Kealey that at all. Who knows? He's just a decent session musician (literally too) riffing off a tune that has been sung for quite some time and pretending that it's his own composition.

    For the sake of argument though what things exactly lead you to believe that Watt follows Sufism?

    Lucid Memes
    Red Belt
    Red Belt

    Number of posts: 1111
    Registration date: 2009-02-12
    Location: Here Be Dragons

    Re: Viewing Alan Watt with post-Kealey Eyes

    Post by Lucid Memes on Sun Jan 03, 2010 8:24 pm

    Extant wrote:For the sake of argument though what things exactly lead you to believe that Watt follows Sufism?

    Well, to be more specific, I recognized Watt as a Gnostic long ago. I feel confident in that assessment, partially because I used to be a Gnostic and found familiar themes easy to recognize. So much so, in 2008 I was working on a video project for my youtube channel, detailing Watt sound bites about his gnostic leanings.

    The thing about it was that Watt would spend a great amount of time debunking all world religions has being part of the system...while at the same time, he'd talk about his experiences evading demons (which is an obvious religious concept)...I remember, one of the only times he gave a potential "solution" (if you can even call it that) to the system was a vague suggestion to an individual spiritual liberation..."a spiritual solution" if you will.

    Now, Gnosticism in a nut shell is that the spirit realm is the only thing that is true, real, holy and good, etc...and that the material world is all that is false, illusionary, and evil. And that the material world was a type of cosmic accident...a type of deviation from the spiritually perfect reality, by which a lesser/base force of evil, hijacked god and created the material world (earth) as a prison for spirits and souls. The base god was called the Demiurge.

    And also, I believe you're right that Watt does placate to his callers or interviewers, but the only times I've heard him counter a person's beliefs was when he rejected normal versions of Christianity and the existence of a physical/material Jesus.

    I never got around to making that video cause I had audio problems. And I'll probably never get around to do it cause I want nothing about Watt on my channel. But here's a quote I was gonna use.
    "Here's another little sort of paradox to all of that. In cultural Christianity and all truths in all ages is out there for the ones that want to find it, always, for the ones who sincerely want to find it. It's there somehow. There's always a thread they can follow, but for the bulk of the people, it is true, they're in the material world. They want a material religion. If they're given truth they will debase it back into a materialistic religion and you see the prosperity of those being preached today by the Bennie Hinn's and these guys who tell you, "send me gold. I want gold. I want it now in this world," and I've seen a tape with him actually saying that. Sure, they will always debase it because they miss the whole point of the spiritual side that Jesus portrays. It's the spiritual search of man to find the Christ within and that's what the whole message was when he tells you "if the Father is in me and then I am in you," I am in you. The Christ is in you. It's not a matter of going to a church in cultural Christianity going through a ritual or a formula like a mathematical formula, 2 and 2 is 4, and you say this and you say that then you're a Christian. That's again for the masses of people because the spiritual path is an individual journey and only the individual can make that journey. You can't do it in a crowd.[...]and once you're on that journey then you know that you're getting closer to that which you would call your Creator because your mind completely alters. The way you view everything suddenly alters and you know you're now on a journey and you know that something is in communication by the very way that you now see the whole world and it's a flow of energy that comes. It was always intended to be that way." - Alan Watt [from Sweet Liberty- 12/29/04]
    "The Greeks talked about the Demiurgos, the base god at the low level of godhood, claiming there's four levels and that the base god is in charge of the world. He is the Lord of the world and he – because the people are base, they've had stringent patriarchal type rules to make their system work – he's unforgiving. If he puts you off guard, you're never sure if he likes you or dislikes you. However, he's not supposedly the only one. He's one level, so he's a Demiurgos; and Jehovah fits that level perfectly well." - Alan Watt [from GregSzymanski_July 31, 2007]

    That's pretty obvious Gnosticism to me, although he may not admit it. That's because gnosticism is a religion that allow you to be spiritual without committing to an "earthly" religion by finding salvation within one's own imagination. I even have several more Gnostic quotes of his from more recent times, from 2008. One of them saying that he does believe in a higher-power, "its not a God not of the world, thats for sure" says Watt. I think his attraction to Kealey's memes was because he saw Kealey's Neanderthals as Gnostic archons (servants of the Demiurge) living inside the Earth (Hell according to Watt).

    It was always clear to me that he was some type of a religious person. It just took me a bit before I could narrow his memes down to a type of Gnosticism. Once I had that, a lot of his behavior even began to make sense. Some of the early Gnostics were isolated hermits. I even have a quote of him saying that the Gnostics had the right idea when they went off to live by themselves...kinda like Alan portrays himself to do, eh?

    And if Watt's branch of Gnostism is exactly a Sufi, I'm not exactly sure. But I have over the years come to recognize Sufism as Islamic Gnosticism. And when Kealey was asked by Jerd about Alan Watt...I remember he was kinda like, "Oh Alan? Yeah I know that guy. He was poor as hell and was funded by the Sufis to go to India." And for whatever reason, which my be very ironic, that answer was one of Kealey's reactions that was just seemed to random to make up LOL.

    "I think people can find the higher truths beyond the base truth "the laws that were given for the base public." I think the individual who is truly seeking will find that, if they seek hard enough they'll even go beyond whichever religion they've been given on the base level, the common religon. Very few do, but some are able to do it, and use that like a stepping stone to get up and come in touch with something far greater than themselves, far bigger than the basic yahweh character with the human characteristics of the bad old, angry old man. There's something much greater in the world than that and some people can go through. I've even talked to people from Islam who've gone beyond Islam on the same path too. They've come to the same conclusions, only because they've done the journey themselves. They've left the dogma behind them, the dogma being given to the general public who needed those basic rules at a certain period in their history." - Alan Watt [from GregSzymanski_July 31, 2007]

    Also, here's an example of Gnostic Sufism I think. If you remember that Robert Anton Wilson video from the Synarchy thread, RAW talked about how the Sufis believed that the highest spiritual truth is not the "white light" but "pure blackness". Here's a clip of Watt talking about avoiding "the light of reincarnation" for the back door, presumably the Sufi blackness IMO.
    Vic uploaded this video a while back. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


    _________________
    [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
    link

    Extant
    Brown Belt
    Brown Belt

    Number of posts: 555
    Registration date: 2009-04-04
    Location: The Forge

    Re: Viewing Alan Watt with post-Kealey Eyes

    Post by Extant on Sun Jan 03, 2010 8:50 pm

    I agree that he presents a Gnostic type view on the world in his most vague sidewipes and hints at esoteric knowledge, but I think it's all show. He's probably had about ten years to absorb this stuff before he burst on the scene, and just knows more than us. But not much more. He uses techniques of influence and persuasion, of the salesman type to reinforce the image.
    So many have a different take on the Watt - Kealey debacle. andre from Outlaw thinks he's cointelpro, an agent of the system who has to earn his own keep as part of the deal. He takes this from a statement Watt made where he said something like: "The agents of the system, who are there to mislead you, have to live as you, among you, and earn their keep just like you to ensure that you believe they're with you." He has other reasons that relate to his worldview on the system. I don't agree with him.

    I, on the other hand, have had numerous encounters with con men and charlatans in the real world, many, many of them when I was travelling up and down the country. After a period of being extremely gullible (I can be by nature), I cottoned on to the methods, the M.O., and the overall style and composition of who they are and what they do. They feign an outward sincerity in a system they know, sometimes inside out, or patch together enough of a valid pretence by instantly sizing people up and using subtle intimidation methods. Watt fits that profile so well, I realised with a sudden snap when Kealeygate happened, and through my own personal dealings with him. They never believe what they say, until at some point, for some of them; some of them get lost in their make believe.
    This is Watt now for me. He's lost in his make believe dystopian fantasy that has some relation indeed to the present state of the world, and this provides the killer authenticity of the "man with a mission" for his fans. The character he orginally was has very possibly become submerged in the present composite.
    And also being attracted to conspiratainment due to its very high fable, or mythology, content, I know when someone is telling a story. A complete piece of spin. I didn't listen to the little voice in my head the first time I heard which said that very thing. Stories, tales, narratives, have always entranced me, activated me, and made me connect to a good one, and he tells a good one. It's a kind of situationist, hyperreal fatal fairy tale he relays.
    That's what it is to me. But Watt is a canvass so suitable for projection. Just look at his devoted audience, which I was one of not so long ago.

    He could be a Gnostic at heart, who knows? Gnosticism was at its base a broad, rich, varied counter-cultural movement that sought to supplant any staid orthodoxy in practice. It was just that Christian orthodoxy that possible gave birth to it, being the disowned shadow it could name and oppose violently. Watt could well fit into that motif. I just have a feeling that he lacks any center to be so. He's like a jack of all faces to me, with no features of his own to present to the world. What a Face
    But then his spiritual solution sure changed in double-quick time when Alex Jones came on the scene eh? It's organised mass protests now with an educated base. Twisted Evil

    Lucid Memes
    Red Belt
    Red Belt

    Number of posts: 1111
    Registration date: 2009-02-12
    Location: Here Be Dragons

    Re: Viewing Alan Watt with post-Kealey Eyes

    Post by Lucid Memes on Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:49 pm

    LOL! Interesting. I agree with most of everything you say. My difference is that I don't think its impossible for a person to have Gnostic inclinations and still be a charlatan...Blavatsky is a perfect example. I'd even say Crowley and someone like Tsarion too...heck, basically all those fuckers in that movement are charlatans. Look at all the local gurus in India for that matter...the charlatans there are a dime a dozen (no offense to India, much the same around the world). Who are they to care if they swindle worthless debased groups of people into a braindead worshiper cult? They're giving you the honor of increasing your spiritual potential by allowing yourself to be swindled by them. Laughing


    _________________
    [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
    link

    Extant
    Brown Belt
    Brown Belt

    Number of posts: 555
    Registration date: 2009-04-04
    Location: The Forge

    Re: Viewing Alan Watt with post-Kealey Eyes

    Post by Extant on Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:53 pm

    lulz. I guess this is true. I think that certain books I've read on Gnosticism recently have painted a picture with more integrity. Reality check time. Laughing

    Lucid Memes
    Red Belt
    Red Belt

    Number of posts: 1111
    Registration date: 2009-02-12
    Location: Here Be Dragons

    Re: Viewing Alan Watt with post-Kealey Eyes

    Post by Lucid Memes on Sun Jan 03, 2010 9:59 pm

    I'm a former Gnostic, formulating a new philosophy btw.

    Instead of being gnostically anti-materialistic...I'm being gnostically anti-memes instead. Is that even possible?


    _________________
    [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
    link

    Extant
    Brown Belt
    Brown Belt

    Number of posts: 555
    Registration date: 2009-04-04
    Location: The Forge

    Re: Viewing Alan Watt with post-Kealey Eyes

    Post by Extant on Sun Jan 03, 2010 10:02 pm

    With Gnosticism many things are possible. I think an early Church Father said of them with despair: "Every hour of every day they invent something new." afro
    If it's not already a Gnostic school of thought Lucid, invent it! It's one great thing about it, all the systems seem fairly non-dogmatic. Except for the entire world being in error and an iron vault prison for your soul in a decaying, decrepid body, etc, etc. Have to work out a way round that one. cyclops

    RB
    Yellow Belt
    Yellow Belt

    Number of posts: 38
    Registration date: 2010-06-12
    Location: thewoods

    Alan Watts WITH the "s" at the end

    Post by RB on Wed Jul 14, 2010 6:47 pm

    [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

    Now that I think about it one of the first book I bought (yes again in a used book store...but this time in Montreal) was a book of Alan Watts. Not Alan Watt. Watts with an 'S'.

    What is freaking me out right now is that that I remember now why I was initially lured in by Alan Watt. Because he borrowed the name of someone who was into public speaking about philosophy, religion, and other spiritual stuff which I used to read all the time.

    Now that I think about it I like the old Alan Watts much better. At least he was funny and brough emotion to the table. The new Alan Watt is like a flat pancake that smell like an old ash tray. Not that there is anything wrong with being a flat pancake that smell like an old ash tray.

    lol

    Cheers to the OLD Alan Watt !

    zwt
    White Belt
    White Belt

    Number of posts: 3
    Registration date: 2010-07-12

    Re: Viewing Alan Watt with post-Kealey Eyes

    Post by zwt on Thu Jul 15, 2010 2:29 am

    since a major part of the information he's making available for less educated people seems genuine and has a logical foundation, I don't understand why you call him a charlatan...

    if his sources are flawed then you should focus on that and not on some peculiarities of his public manifestation.

    about the part in which he simply ignores questions from callers, I consider it somewhat in the lines of a FAQ. You can't ask the man questions that have been answered before. just like saying RTFM. it's not a lot of fun in going round and round with someone who throws irrational "arguments" at you.

    his fan base, if he has one, is in search of a messiah, someone with the answers. maybe there are none to be found. they need to believe, that's their problem.

    in the end, if someone is asking you to give something, it's your fault if you accept Smile if I'm not mistaken, he's repeating very often to the listener to think for himself.

      Current date/time is Wed Jul 23, 2014 1:03 pm