The patent application for ‘rational inquiry’ has the first 21 modules of ethos. (see: 2003 05 26 patent application for rational-inquiry-2)
There is a crime and punishment module.
Page 179: coaches are to make sure that students understand ‘that punishment upholds our ethical system and without punishment there can be no ethics’
So Raniere was following the doctrine when he told me his ethics required him to punish.
But remember that he wrote the doctrine for self-serving reasons. It allows him (or any superior in the organization) to punish a student who is considered to be in ‘ethical breach’. And to claim ethical superiority for doing so.
In NXIVM, ‘ethics’ always supersede ‘rules’ (like immigration or tax laws…). They consider it routine to break ‘rules’ to uphold ‘ethics.’
And Raniere is the ultimate authority on ethics.
Of course, the NXIVM philosophy on crime and punishment is both a total non-sequitur (the justification presented for it in the patent application is laughable), and contrary to the hard-won lessons of Western civilization.
We have rules (laws) because, even though they are imperfect, they are intended to be precise and to attempt to allow judgement by fair process.
Judging every action of others subjectively by unwritten ‘ethical principles’ is a recipe for dictatorship.
Which is probably exactly why Raniere wrote it that way.
Add Comment