The I Ching on Biden, Sanders and Buttigieg

Biden

- -

---

- -

-o-

---

---

Nine in the third place means:
Waiting in the mud
Brings about the arrival of the enemy.

I'd say the mud is the indulgence of the people.

Sanders

---

---

---

- -

---

-o-

Nine at the beginning means:
Simple conduct. Progress without blame.

I'd say the simplicity lies in the distance between theory and practice.

Buttigieg

-o-

- -

-o-

- -

-o-

---

Nine in the second place means:
One meets his lord in a narrow street.
No blame.

Nine in the fourth place means:
Isolated through opposition,
One meets a like-minded man
With whom one can associate in good faith.
Despite the danger, no blame.

Nine at the top means:
Isolated through opposition,
One sees one's companion as a pig covered with dirt,
As a wagon full of devils.
First one draws a bow against him,
Then one lays the bow aside.
He is not a robber; he will woo at the right time.
As one goes, rain falls; then good fortune comes.

I'd say these are the signs of being in demand.

Usually, when someone says, he wouldn't know how to make it up, he just did.

I could make up these results, but it would be laborious. It is funny though how the I Ching manages to convey the perspectives of different people. From my cold perspective Buttigieg is of course nothing more than the last best hope of a European America. In France, intellectuals write programs, based on what they think other intellectuals consider relevant. In America, actors portray ideas, based on what they think sponsors consider paramount. Already there you can see that systemic convergence is not without peril: the intellectual is checked by the intellectual and the sponsor by the favour of the public. If the public were to bow to the authority of the actor, who would keep the sponsor (assuredly the actor could be shot) in check? Unless the American voters are mean, they risk the stability of the world.

Of course, there is a faction that has the answer to this: make obedience to intellectuals the social norm, but that road is too long to just jump from start to finish without knocking over the world in the process, and it cannot be shortened without pulling the finish into the dark. So, even the nicest person can end up arguing for abominable things. It is understood though that whoever decides in the matter has to do his due diligence, lest all speech had to be padded: It is one thing to lead astray, another to see only a part of the way.