It’s been a while since I have consulted the I Ching. With the US midterm elections behind us, I thought it was a good moment to cast the coins. To recall: back in February, I asked the oracle how the Republicans might fare in the elections, and my reading of the response then suggested they might hold on to their majorities in both houses of Congress. They did not, but that may have been due to their uncompromising stance, which the I Ching had cautioned against (Republicans did not "lay aside the bow"). Remember: I Ching divinations are always conditional, they depend upon choices made by the people involved, and people always have the capacity to make choices contrary to the oracle’s advice, which is what the Republicans did this year.
In any event, the big US political question now, it seems to me, is: will President Bush find a compromise on Iraq (since the war is undermining his popularity and authority), that will allow him to reverse his declining political fortunes?
And the oracle tell us that perhaps he will but, in order for that to happen, decisive action, analogous to criminal proceedings, must be taken against the people who stand in the way of compromise. This could mean several things, all of which are bad for one or another Republican leader. More below the jump:
The details of this divination are straightforward: Hexagram 21, "Biting Through," with no moving lines:
The two trigrams (the upper three lines and the lower three lines) represent a combination of thunder and lightening, which signify clear and decisive action. The overall hexagram symbolizes a mouth with a stick or something across it, requiring some sort of "biting through" to break and remove the obstacle. In terms of the question posed: something is in the way of a solution for Iraq, and that something needs to be "bitten through" energetically.
The hexagram has a Legalist tone. The action called for is described in terms of law and swift penalties, the cornerstones of Legalist thinking. Here is the Image:
Thunder and lightening:
The image of Biting Through.
Thus the kings of former times made firm the laws
Through clearly defined penalties.
And then there is this:
When an obstacle to union arises, energetic biting through brings success. This is true in all situations. Whenever unity cannot be established, the obstruction is due to a talebearer and traitor who is interfering and blocking the way. To prevent permanent injury, vigorous measures must be taken at once.
It would seem, then, that some individuals are the "obstruction;" some sort of "traitor" (which may be too strong of a term for our application) or "talebearer" is in the way. The big question for us is: who is the obstruction?
Could it be the Democratic Party leadership? Bush would very much like to brand them as "traitors" but I think this interpretation is not in keeping with the question. It seems to me that Democrats are not the obstacle to compromise in Iraq (the original question), rather, they are the ones calling for such compromise.
Who among Republicans might this be referring to? The first, most obvious, person is former Defense Secretary Rumsfeld. He now faces criminal charges (which is in keeping with the literal word of the hexagram) and his legal and political troubles are weakening the most hawkish elements in the administration. Is the hexagram suggesting that Bush should not fight back against these charges and sacrifice Rumsfeld in the interest of "biting through" the obstacles to an Iraq compromise?
Another possibility is Vice President Cheney. He has been able to stay in power and is now, with Rumsfeld gone, the primary advocate of hard-core hawkishness toward Iraq. Maybe he needs to be "bitten through." I do not think that we need to take the Legalist terms literally here. The oracle may just be saying that Cheney must be pushed aside to advance in Iraq.
Finally, one has to entertain the possibility that the obstacle is Bush himself. The I Ching could be suggesting that legal proceedings need to be brought against the President – impeachment – in order to improve things in Iraq. I hope this is not the case. We have done one impeachment recently, and they do not really work all that well. Also, it is a bit of a stretch to believe that impeachment proceedings against Bush would chasten him into compromising on Iraq and, ultimately, improve his political standing (though Clinton was able to maintain high approval numbers after his impeachment).
The bottom line: heads will have to roll, Republican heads most likely, if Bush is to do what is necessary in Iraq to salvage his political legacy. Who will it be?
Maybe it will be no one. Maybe Bush will not be able to do what the oracle says should be done; he may be unable to act decisively against his political allies and improve his position. That would be not only bad for him, but bad for the country.
The Useless Tree 
Leave a comment