I came across this amazing video on YouTube showing a species of octopus found in Northern Australia that is adapted to walk on land:
I came across this amazing video on YouTube showing a species of octopus found in Northern Australia that is adapted to walk on land:
Here’s Joan Helle-Fasolo’s July 4, 2017 image, which EarthSky misidentified as an iridescent cloud. In fact, this is an entirely different sky phenomenon, called a circumhorizon arc.
George Preoteasa responded to the photo above, which we published earlier this month – taken by Joan Helle-Fasolo at Ship Bottom, New Jersey – showing rainbow-like colors in the sky. EarthSky misidentified it as a photo of iridescent clouds. In fact, it’s a circumhorizon arc. Mistaking one for the other is easy, especially if all you have to go on is a photo.
How can you tell the difference in the sky, or in a picture?
George Preoteasa had an answer for us. He said he’d also mistakenly identified one sky phenomenon for the other, and so made a study of how to tell them apart. George wrote:
The circumhorizon arc is a band parallel to the horizon. So, to the extent that the horizon is an arc, this is one, too. The colors in a circumhorizon arc are well organized, red at the top, indigo at the bottom. With cloud iridescence, the colors are more randomly distributed.
Circumhorizon arcs have a certain fuzziness. They are caused by ice
crystals in cirrus clouds, much as solar and lunar halos are. Iridescence, on the other hand, is caused by water droplets.For a circumhorizon arc to occur, the sun must be high up, over 58 degrees above the horizon. Iridescence usually occurs close to the sun, which makes it difficult to photograph. You need to hide the sun so that sunlight does not overwhelm the colors in the cloud.
This is an iridescent cloud. The colors are not as organized as in a circumhorizon arc, and they tend to be seen near the sun. Best way to see one is to place the sun itself behind some foreground object, a building or mountain, for example. Duke Marsh captured this image in 2012 in New Albany, Indiana.
George continued:
It’s funny, but I made the same mistake. I was using the CloudSpotter app from the Cloud Appreciation Society. If you see clouds or cloud features or optical phenomena, you can take a picture and submit it for verification. I submitted the shot below as iridescence, and the moderator pointed out it’s not, but rather a fragment of a circumhorizon arc.
After that, I went to Les Cowley’s website – Atmospheric Optics – and immediately it became clear that the Cloud Appreciation Society moderator was right. So now I’m spreading the knowledge :-)
Thank you, George!
Here’s the image George Preoteasa captured, which he at first thought was an example of an iridescent cloud. Now he knows it’s a circumhorizon arc, and he described these arcs this way: “Imagine a horizontal band at the level where you see the colors. If you had cirrus clouds with the same properties as the one with the colors, you would get a nice colored arc parallel to the horizon. For a circumhorizon arc to occur, the sun must be high up in the sky, above 58 degrees. The fact that the sun does not appear in this picture is another clue it’s not iridescence.”
George also very kindly went into an EarthSky article about iridescent clouds and found three photos that are really circumhorizon arcs. We next sent those three photos through the world’s sky optics guru, Les Cowley of Atmospheric Optics, for confirmation. Les – who is a long-time friend of EarthSky and often helps us identify sky phenomena – confirmed that, yes, the photos below are all circumhorizon arcs. He also confirmed that:
… one key difference between a circumhorizon arc and iridescence is color structure. A circumhorizon arc has a spectral sequence of color with red at top and blue/violet lowest.
A circumhorizon arc is always about two outstretched hand-widths below the sun. Iridescent clouds are usually rather closer.
Thank you, Les.
Read more about circumhorizon arcs on Les Cowley’s website, Atmospheric Optics
Below are the three photos EarthSky had misidentified:
Circumhorizon arc. The band is parallel to the horizon with red at the top, indigo at the bottom. The sun is well out of the picture. For circumhorizon arcs, the sun is always at least twice the span from thumb to little finger of your outstretched hand, held at arm’s length. Photo taken May 31, 2016 by Laura Berry.
Circumhorizon arc. Parallel to horizon. Red at top, indigo at bottom. Sun well out of picture, at least 2 hand-spans away. A circumhorizon arc can look slightly curved in photographs, but the curvature isn’t real; it’s due to the distortion that camera lenses can make. In the sky, circumhorizon arcs are completely straight. Photo taken May 27, 2013 by Mike O’Neal.
Circumhorizon arc. If there were more cloud here, you could see more of the arc, which is parallel to the horizon with red at the top, indigo at the bottom. Photo taken May 24, 2017 by Zaneta Kosiba Vargas in Santa Barbara, California.
The Cloud Appreciation Society had this to say about the likelihood of seeing a circumhorizon arc:
The rarity of the circumhorizon arc depends on where you’re based. The lower the latitude, the greater your chance of spotting a circumhorizon arc when Cirrus or Cirrostratus clouds are in the sky. Les Cowley … reports in his Atmospheric Optics site that from most locations in the U.S. they can be observed about five times a year, but from locations in northern Europe you might see them only once or twice. Likewise, they’re more commonly seen in Australia than in New Zealand. You’ll never see a circumhorizon arc, however, from latitudes above 56 degrees – in the Northern Hemisphere, that’s anywhere north of Copenhagen, Denmark – since the sun never climbs high enough in the sky.
Nor is it possible, unless you’re near the equator, to see a circumhorizon arc throughout the year. For most of us, the dependance of this vibrant optical effect on a such high sun means that its horizontal streak of pure, spectral color will only ever grace our skies during the summertime.
Bottom line: It’s easy to confuse iridescent clouds with circumhorizon arcs. Here are some tips that can help you tell these two elusive, colorful, beautiful sky phenomena apart.
Here’s Joan Helle-Fasolo’s July 4, 2017 image, which EarthSky misidentified as an iridescent cloud. In fact, this is an entirely different sky phenomenon, called a circumhorizon arc.
George Preoteasa responded to the photo above, which we published earlier this month – taken by Joan Helle-Fasolo at Ship Bottom, New Jersey – showing rainbow-like colors in the sky. EarthSky misidentified it as a photo of iridescent clouds. In fact, it’s a circumhorizon arc. Mistaking one for the other is easy, especially if all you have to go on is a photo.
How can you tell the difference in the sky, or in a picture?
George Preoteasa had an answer for us. He said he’d also mistakenly identified one sky phenomenon for the other, and so made a study of how to tell them apart. George wrote:
The circumhorizon arc is a band parallel to the horizon. So, to the extent that the horizon is an arc, this is one, too. The colors in a circumhorizon arc are well organized, red at the top, indigo at the bottom. With cloud iridescence, the colors are more randomly distributed.
Circumhorizon arcs have a certain fuzziness. They are caused by ice
crystals in cirrus clouds, much as solar and lunar halos are. Iridescence, on the other hand, is caused by water droplets.For a circumhorizon arc to occur, the sun must be high up, over 58 degrees above the horizon. Iridescence usually occurs close to the sun, which makes it difficult to photograph. You need to hide the sun so that sunlight does not overwhelm the colors in the cloud.
This is an iridescent cloud. The colors are not as organized as in a circumhorizon arc, and they tend to be seen near the sun. Best way to see one is to place the sun itself behind some foreground object, a building or mountain, for example. Duke Marsh captured this image in 2012 in New Albany, Indiana.
George continued:
It’s funny, but I made the same mistake. I was using the CloudSpotter app from the Cloud Appreciation Society. If you see clouds or cloud features or optical phenomena, you can take a picture and submit it for verification. I submitted the shot below as iridescence, and the moderator pointed out it’s not, but rather a fragment of a circumhorizon arc.
After that, I went to Les Cowley’s website – Atmospheric Optics – and immediately it became clear that the Cloud Appreciation Society moderator was right. So now I’m spreading the knowledge :-)
Thank you, George!
Here’s the image George Preoteasa captured, which he at first thought was an example of an iridescent cloud. Now he knows it’s a circumhorizon arc, and he described these arcs this way: “Imagine a horizontal band at the level where you see the colors. If you had cirrus clouds with the same properties as the one with the colors, you would get a nice colored arc parallel to the horizon. For a circumhorizon arc to occur, the sun must be high up in the sky, above 58 degrees. The fact that the sun does not appear in this picture is another clue it’s not iridescence.”
George also very kindly went into an EarthSky article about iridescent clouds and found three photos that are really circumhorizon arcs. We next sent those three photos through the world’s sky optics guru, Les Cowley of Atmospheric Optics, for confirmation. Les – who is a long-time friend of EarthSky and often helps us identify sky phenomena – confirmed that, yes, the photos below are all circumhorizon arcs. He also confirmed that:
… one key difference between a circumhorizon arc and iridescence is color structure. A circumhorizon arc has a spectral sequence of color with red at top and blue/violet lowest.
A circumhorizon arc is always about two outstretched hand-widths below the sun. Iridescent clouds are usually rather closer.
Thank you, Les.
Read more about circumhorizon arcs on Les Cowley’s website, Atmospheric Optics
Below are the three photos EarthSky had misidentified:
Circumhorizon arc. The band is parallel to the horizon with red at the top, indigo at the bottom. The sun is well out of the picture. For circumhorizon arcs, the sun is always at least twice the span from thumb to little finger of your outstretched hand, held at arm’s length. Photo taken May 31, 2016 by Laura Berry.
Circumhorizon arc. Parallel to horizon. Red at top, indigo at bottom. Sun well out of picture, at least 2 hand-spans away. A circumhorizon arc can look slightly curved in photographs, but the curvature isn’t real; it’s due to the distortion that camera lenses can make. In the sky, circumhorizon arcs are completely straight. Photo taken May 27, 2013 by Mike O’Neal.
Circumhorizon arc. If there were more cloud here, you could see more of the arc, which is parallel to the horizon with red at the top, indigo at the bottom. Photo taken May 24, 2017 by Zaneta Kosiba Vargas in Santa Barbara, California.
The Cloud Appreciation Society had this to say about the likelihood of seeing a circumhorizon arc:
The rarity of the circumhorizon arc depends on where you’re based. The lower the latitude, the greater your chance of spotting a circumhorizon arc when Cirrus or Cirrostratus clouds are in the sky. Les Cowley … reports in his Atmospheric Optics site that from most locations in the U.S. they can be observed about five times a year, but from locations in northern Europe you might see them only once or twice. Likewise, they’re more commonly seen in Australia than in New Zealand. You’ll never see a circumhorizon arc, however, from latitudes above 56 degrees – in the Northern Hemisphere, that’s anywhere north of Copenhagen, Denmark – since the sun never climbs high enough in the sky.
Nor is it possible, unless you’re near the equator, to see a circumhorizon arc throughout the year. For most of us, the dependance of this vibrant optical effect on a such high sun means that its horizontal streak of pure, spectral color will only ever grace our skies during the summertime.
Bottom line: It’s easy to confuse iridescent clouds with circumhorizon arcs. Here are some tips that can help you tell these two elusive, colorful, beautiful sky phenomena apart.
Here’s what a first quarter moon looks like. The terminator line – or line between light and dark on the moon – appears straight. Aqilla Othman in Port Dickson, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia caught this photo on May 3, 2017. Notice that he caught Lunar X and Lunar V.
The moon last reached its first quarter phase on July 1, 2017, at 0:51 UTC, and will do so again this month on July 30, 2017, at 15:23 UTC. Full moon will be August 7 at 18:11 UTC; translate UTC to your time zone.
This waxing moon and upcoming full moon will interfere with the 2017 Perseid meteor shower. That’s why we’re recommending that you watch meteors this weekend, or in the coming week.
Also, this moon – waxing inexorably toward full moon and then to the waning moon phases and finally back to a new moon – will ultimately cover the sun in the much-anticipated total solar eclipse of August 21, 2017.
The Earth and moon are like mirrors to each other. If you were on the moon at its last quarter phase, you’d see a last quarter Earth. Simulation of last quarter Earth as viewed from 1st quarter moon (2017 July 30 at 15:23 UTC). The terminator or shadow line represents Earth’s line of sunsets. Image via Fourmilab.
A first quarter moon shows half of its lighted hemisphere – half of its day side – to Earth.
The first quarter moon and the planet Mercury’s greatest evening (eastern) elongation both occur on the same date by Universal Time, on July 30, 2017. As darkness falls on July 30, let the moon guide you to the dazzling planet Jupiter – and possibly to Mercury, the solar system’s innermost planet. An imaginary line from the moon through Jupiter, the brightest starlike object in the evening sky, just might enable you to catch Mercury near the horizon at late dusk, as shown on the chart below.
On July 29 and 30, 2017, the moon’s lit side points in the direction of the planets Jupiter and Mercury. Read more.
At quarter moon, the moon’s disk is half-illuminated by sunlight and half-immersed in the moon’s own shadow.
We call this moon a quarter and not a half because it is one quarter of the way around in its orbit of Earth, as measured from one new moon to the next. Also, although a first quarter moon appears half-lit to us, the illuminated portion we see of a first quarter moon truly is just a quarter. We’re now seeing half the moon’s day side, that is. Another lighted quarter of the moon shines just as brightly in the direction opposite Earth!
Here’s a closer look at Lunar X and Lunar V. Photo taken May 3, 2017 by Izaty Liyana in Port Dickson, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia. What is Lunar X?
And what about the term half moon? That’s a beloved term, but not an official one.
A first quarter moon rises at noon and is highest in the sky at sunset. It sets around midnight. First quarter moon comes a week after new moon. Now, as seen from above, the moon in its orbit around Earth is at right angles to a line between the Earth and sun.
As the moon orbits Earth, it changes phase in an orderly way. Follow these links to understand the various phases of the moon.
Four keys to understanding moon phases
Where’s the moon? Waxing crescent
Where’s the moon? First quarter
Where’s the moon? Waxing gibbous
What’s special about a full moon?
Where’s the moon? Waning gibbous
Where’s the moon? Last quarter
Where’s the moon? Waning crescent
Where’s the moon? New phase
Here’s what a first quarter moon looks like. The terminator line – or line between light and dark on the moon – appears straight. Aqilla Othman in Port Dickson, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia caught this photo on May 3, 2017. Notice that he caught Lunar X and Lunar V.
The moon last reached its first quarter phase on July 1, 2017, at 0:51 UTC, and will do so again this month on July 30, 2017, at 15:23 UTC. Full moon will be August 7 at 18:11 UTC; translate UTC to your time zone.
This waxing moon and upcoming full moon will interfere with the 2017 Perseid meteor shower. That’s why we’re recommending that you watch meteors this weekend, or in the coming week.
Also, this moon – waxing inexorably toward full moon and then to the waning moon phases and finally back to a new moon – will ultimately cover the sun in the much-anticipated total solar eclipse of August 21, 2017.
The Earth and moon are like mirrors to each other. If you were on the moon at its last quarter phase, you’d see a last quarter Earth. Simulation of last quarter Earth as viewed from 1st quarter moon (2017 July 30 at 15:23 UTC). The terminator or shadow line represents Earth’s line of sunsets. Image via Fourmilab.
A first quarter moon shows half of its lighted hemisphere – half of its day side – to Earth.
The first quarter moon and the planet Mercury’s greatest evening (eastern) elongation both occur on the same date by Universal Time, on July 30, 2017. As darkness falls on July 30, let the moon guide you to the dazzling planet Jupiter – and possibly to Mercury, the solar system’s innermost planet. An imaginary line from the moon through Jupiter, the brightest starlike object in the evening sky, just might enable you to catch Mercury near the horizon at late dusk, as shown on the chart below.
On July 29 and 30, 2017, the moon’s lit side points in the direction of the planets Jupiter and Mercury. Read more.
At quarter moon, the moon’s disk is half-illuminated by sunlight and half-immersed in the moon’s own shadow.
We call this moon a quarter and not a half because it is one quarter of the way around in its orbit of Earth, as measured from one new moon to the next. Also, although a first quarter moon appears half-lit to us, the illuminated portion we see of a first quarter moon truly is just a quarter. We’re now seeing half the moon’s day side, that is. Another lighted quarter of the moon shines just as brightly in the direction opposite Earth!
Here’s a closer look at Lunar X and Lunar V. Photo taken May 3, 2017 by Izaty Liyana in Port Dickson, Negeri Sembilan, Malaysia. What is Lunar X?
And what about the term half moon? That’s a beloved term, but not an official one.
A first quarter moon rises at noon and is highest in the sky at sunset. It sets around midnight. First quarter moon comes a week after new moon. Now, as seen from above, the moon in its orbit around Earth is at right angles to a line between the Earth and sun.
As the moon orbits Earth, it changes phase in an orderly way. Follow these links to understand the various phases of the moon.
Four keys to understanding moon phases
Where’s the moon? Waxing crescent
Where’s the moon? First quarter
Where’s the moon? Waxing gibbous
What’s special about a full moon?
Where’s the moon? Waning gibbous
Where’s the moon? Last quarter
Where’s the moon? Waning crescent
Where’s the moon? New phase
Meteors ahead! Everything you need to know: Perseid meteor shower
In late July and early August, if you’re up early and have an unobstructed view to the east, be sure to look in that direction in the hour before dawn. You might find a familiar figure – a constellation that is always returning to the sky around this time of year. It’s the beautiful constellation Orion the Hunter – recently behind the sun as seen from our earthly vantage point – now ascending once more in the east before sunrise.
The Hunter appears each northern winter as a mighty constellation arcing across the south during the evening hours. Many people see it then, and notice it, because the pattern of Orion’s stars is so distinctive.
But, at the crack of dawn in late summer, you can spot Orion in the east. Thus Orion has been called the ghost of the shimmering summer dawn.
The Hunter rises on his side, with his three Belt stars – Mintaka, Alnitak and Alnilam – pointing straight up.
Enjoying EarthSky so far? Sign up for our free daily newsletter today!
The constellation Orion as viewed at morning dawn in early August. Image via Flickr user Micheal C. Rael
Also, notice the star Aldebaran in the constellation Taurus the Bull. Aldebaran is the brightest star in Taurus the Bull. It’s said to be the Bull’s fiery red eye. See the V-shaped pattern of stars around Aldebaran? This pattern represents the Bull’s face. In skylore, Orion is said to be holding up a great shield . . . fending off the charging Bull. Can you imagine this by looking at the chart at right? It’s easy to imagine when you look at the real sky before dawn at this time of year.
The return of Orion and Taurus to the predawn sky happens in late July or early August every year.
To see Orion, view larger. | Tim Herring in Boise, Idaho caught the brilliant planet Venus (upper left) and the constellation Orion (right) on July 29, 2017. He wrote: “Venus and the ghost of summer, Orion. Checking out the sky for early morning meteors while letting out the dogs, Venus was shining above Orion. Hiding in the slight cloud cover, the entire Hunter was hard to glimpse, but the camera caught him!”
Bottom line: In the wee hours before daybreak, look for Orion the Hunter. From the Northern Hemisphere, Orion is sometimes called the ghost of the summer dawn.
Donate: Your support means the world to us
EarthSky’s meteor shower guide for 2015
Meteors ahead! Everything you need to know: Perseid meteor shower
In late July and early August, if you’re up early and have an unobstructed view to the east, be sure to look in that direction in the hour before dawn. You might find a familiar figure – a constellation that is always returning to the sky around this time of year. It’s the beautiful constellation Orion the Hunter – recently behind the sun as seen from our earthly vantage point – now ascending once more in the east before sunrise.
The Hunter appears each northern winter as a mighty constellation arcing across the south during the evening hours. Many people see it then, and notice it, because the pattern of Orion’s stars is so distinctive.
But, at the crack of dawn in late summer, you can spot Orion in the east. Thus Orion has been called the ghost of the shimmering summer dawn.
The Hunter rises on his side, with his three Belt stars – Mintaka, Alnitak and Alnilam – pointing straight up.
Enjoying EarthSky so far? Sign up for our free daily newsletter today!
The constellation Orion as viewed at morning dawn in early August. Image via Flickr user Micheal C. Rael
Also, notice the star Aldebaran in the constellation Taurus the Bull. Aldebaran is the brightest star in Taurus the Bull. It’s said to be the Bull’s fiery red eye. See the V-shaped pattern of stars around Aldebaran? This pattern represents the Bull’s face. In skylore, Orion is said to be holding up a great shield . . . fending off the charging Bull. Can you imagine this by looking at the chart at right? It’s easy to imagine when you look at the real sky before dawn at this time of year.
The return of Orion and Taurus to the predawn sky happens in late July or early August every year.
To see Orion, view larger. | Tim Herring in Boise, Idaho caught the brilliant planet Venus (upper left) and the constellation Orion (right) on July 29, 2017. He wrote: “Venus and the ghost of summer, Orion. Checking out the sky for early morning meteors while letting out the dogs, Venus was shining above Orion. Hiding in the slight cloud cover, the entire Hunter was hard to glimpse, but the camera caught him!”
Bottom line: In the wee hours before daybreak, look for Orion the Hunter. From the Northern Hemisphere, Orion is sometimes called the ghost of the summer dawn.
Donate: Your support means the world to us
EarthSky’s meteor shower guide for 2015
More politics, but since it is cunningly disguised as a reply to mt’s Twitter rant, I think I may get away with it. You should go off and read mt’s post, for context. But not for content; much as I like his take on the science I can never agree with his take on the politics. Here’s a sample:
One reason for the buckling of democracy is the stealing of people’s time and emotional energy in high stakes marketplace hypercompetition. Democracy can be preserved or restored only if & when daily life is secure. A key reason to support Universal Basic Income1 or similar ideas. A calm and confident people can learn, absorb ideas, weigh strategies. A hassled population buffeted by competing shallow ideas cannot… I’m old enough to remember intelligent, respectful, intellectually challenging debate on television. The idea seems almost unimaginable now!2
How could anyone possibly object to that? Everyone knows that things used to be better in the olde dayes, and Modern Life is Rubbish, yes? Well, no. I really wish mt – and others – would read Popper’s The Open Society and Its Enemies. There is so much in there that you need to know, you need to think about. And of course it is far better written there than I could possibly hope to summarise here. Oddly, I don’t find a post by me on it before, except bookshelf which only lightly touches it. The themes relevant here are: don’t believe in an Age of Gold; and be cautious about trying to design society.
But to address mt’s points myself: people are not short of time. Oh, I know it feels like it, but even I have hours every evening to do things in; so many hours that I generally have time to go rowing in the evening. It is easy to feel terribly busy, and doubtless many do; it is even easy to be very busy if you want to be; but if you want free time to think that is possible. But many people don’t really want free time to think. The idea that “hypercompetition” or modern capitalism or something is “stealing” people’s time is I think just excuse-making. Or, I-would-have-got-away-with-it-if-it-weren’t-for-those-dammed-capitalists.
So if it isn’t that, what is it?
This is my excuse to introduce Public Choice Theory4 which is yet another thing that I have but a glancing acquaintance with. One aspect of said theory is to address people’s behaviour when voting or more generally when wondering how much of their time to devote to politics. What is “rational” behaviour? And the answer, of course, is that rationally most individuals should spend very little of their time working out how to vote, informing themselves of political issues of the day, and so on. Because: their own vote will have very little impact. Any benefits gained from getting it right are diffuse, as are any losses from getting it wrong. Thus although the choice of president will clearly have major consequences, those consequences fall on everyone; and so the rational voter should not go to any great effort in fully evaluating the choice3. This theory, of course doesn’t address those like your humble author for whom interest in politics is an end in itself.
Does this go anywhere? I think it does, in that without understanding we are doomed to fail. mt is trying to go somewhere; he is trying to save the world. It’s a big one; his conclusion – which is less of a conclusion than an aspiration, this was a rant, recall – is I’m not eager to abandon democracy as an ideal, but it demands participation & engagement… Everyone on earth should be guaranteed food and shelter… We might still pull a decent future out if we address our idiotic commitment to a policy of maximum employment at minimum wage. I’m glad he doesn’t want to abandon democracy; just look at the places that have, like Venezuela. And I’d be happy with an UBI; so would many economists; so I suspect would many on the right, if the left would take basic seriously. The last sentence of his I’ve quoted is problematic, though, no matter how much it chimes with Timmy’s repeated jobs are a cost, not a benefit. It just feels like the wrong thing to be pushing, to me. What would I prefer to push? Free trade; a carbon tax; constitutional government. That wasn’t a well thought out list, but it hardly matters; I consistently fail to convince anyone of their virtues.
1. I am in favour of an Universal Basic Income (UBI), though with some stress on the word basic; I don’t think I’ve said that explicitly but it implicit here.
2. I really can’t remember TV in the old days. I haven’t watched it for decades. Why would you? But if it has lost serious debate, perhaps it is because it has moved to a more serious medium; online perhaps.
3. This of course has always been true. Public Choice Theory is a fairly recent developement, but that’s irrelevant, because most people are unaware of it. So if mt is claiming – with evidence – that people used to think more carefully in the old days, and the current rather thoughtless electorate represents a change, then I’m open to looking at the evidence.
4. Indeed, I was entirely unaware of it until recently. I think it was only the fuss about Nancy Maclean’s “Democracy in chains” that the Libertarians are so sad about that brought it to my notice; see for example More on Nancy MacLean’s Distorted Portrait of Jim Buchanan’s Tax-Reform Analysis. Majoritarianism is another topic that I must return to; Public Choice provides another way to look at co-operation with government, too, helpfully supplementing the Libertarian viewpoint.
More politics, but since it is cunningly disguised as a reply to mt’s Twitter rant, I think I may get away with it. You should go off and read mt’s post, for context. But not for content; much as I like his take on the science I can never agree with his take on the politics. Here’s a sample:
One reason for the buckling of democracy is the stealing of people’s time and emotional energy in high stakes marketplace hypercompetition. Democracy can be preserved or restored only if & when daily life is secure. A key reason to support Universal Basic Income1 or similar ideas. A calm and confident people can learn, absorb ideas, weigh strategies. A hassled population buffeted by competing shallow ideas cannot… I’m old enough to remember intelligent, respectful, intellectually challenging debate on television. The idea seems almost unimaginable now!2
How could anyone possibly object to that? Everyone knows that things used to be better in the olde dayes, and Modern Life is Rubbish, yes? Well, no. I really wish mt – and others – would read Popper’s The Open Society and Its Enemies. There is so much in there that you need to know, you need to think about. And of course it is far better written there than I could possibly hope to summarise here. Oddly, I don’t find a post by me on it before, except bookshelf which only lightly touches it. The themes relevant here are: don’t believe in an Age of Gold; and be cautious about trying to design society.
But to address mt’s points myself: people are not short of time. Oh, I know it feels like it, but even I have hours every evening to do things in; so many hours that I generally have time to go rowing in the evening. It is easy to feel terribly busy, and doubtless many do; it is even easy to be very busy if you want to be; but if you want free time to think that is possible. But many people don’t really want free time to think. The idea that “hypercompetition” or modern capitalism or something is “stealing” people’s time is I think just excuse-making. Or, I-would-have-got-away-with-it-if-it-weren’t-for-those-dammed-capitalists.
So if it isn’t that, what is it?
This is my excuse to introduce Public Choice Theory4 which is yet another thing that I have but a glancing acquaintance with. One aspect of said theory is to address people’s behaviour when voting or more generally when wondering how much of their time to devote to politics. What is “rational” behaviour? And the answer, of course, is that rationally most individuals should spend very little of their time working out how to vote, informing themselves of political issues of the day, and so on. Because: their own vote will have very little impact. Any benefits gained from getting it right are diffuse, as are any losses from getting it wrong. Thus although the choice of president will clearly have major consequences, those consequences fall on everyone; and so the rational voter should not go to any great effort in fully evaluating the choice3. This theory, of course doesn’t address those like your humble author for whom interest in politics is an end in itself.
Does this go anywhere? I think it does, in that without understanding we are doomed to fail. mt is trying to go somewhere; he is trying to save the world. It’s a big one; his conclusion – which is less of a conclusion than an aspiration, this was a rant, recall – is I’m not eager to abandon democracy as an ideal, but it demands participation & engagement… Everyone on earth should be guaranteed food and shelter… We might still pull a decent future out if we address our idiotic commitment to a policy of maximum employment at minimum wage. I’m glad he doesn’t want to abandon democracy; just look at the places that have, like Venezuela. And I’d be happy with an UBI; so would many economists; so I suspect would many on the right, if the left would take basic seriously. The last sentence of his I’ve quoted is problematic, though, no matter how much it chimes with Timmy’s repeated jobs are a cost, not a benefit. It just feels like the wrong thing to be pushing, to me. What would I prefer to push? Free trade; a carbon tax; constitutional government. That wasn’t a well thought out list, but it hardly matters; I consistently fail to convince anyone of their virtues.
1. I am in favour of an Universal Basic Income (UBI), though with some stress on the word basic; I don’t think I’ve said that explicitly but it implicit here.
2. I really can’t remember TV in the old days. I haven’t watched it for decades. Why would you? But if it has lost serious debate, perhaps it is because it has moved to a more serious medium; online perhaps.
3. This of course has always been true. Public Choice Theory is a fairly recent developement, but that’s irrelevant, because most people are unaware of it. So if mt is claiming – with evidence – that people used to think more carefully in the old days, and the current rather thoughtless electorate represents a change, then I’m open to looking at the evidence.
4. Indeed, I was entirely unaware of it until recently. I think it was only the fuss about Nancy Maclean’s “Democracy in chains” that the Libertarians are so sad about that brought it to my notice; see for example More on Nancy MacLean’s Distorted Portrait of Jim Buchanan’s Tax-Reform Analysis. Majoritarianism is another topic that I must return to; Public Choice provides another way to look at co-operation with government, too, helpfully supplementing the Libertarian viewpoint.
