Solar Power and Energy Independence

I have had many conversations with those close to me about sustainable energy, and why Big Oil, Edison, and other major energy producers are so stubbornly opposed to the transition to more sustainable energy sources like Solar power.  The argument I often hear is "wouldn't they make MORE money?"  Or else "The oil will run out.  Investment in Solar is an investment in THEIR OWN future." We can also point to arguments made on both sides of the climate change debate.  However, it is my assessment that the reality of climate change and even money come secondary to the true purpose behind the continued reliance on coal and fossil fuels.  The ultimate reason for the resistance to solar energy is not to make objectively higher profits, it is to control the market for energy.

Examine what has already happened with solar energy: those who have invested the funds into making their homes fully integrate solar energy, with modern panels, tend to have their energy bills drastically slashed, or even nonexistent.  At the far end of the spectrum, some users even gain some monthly INCOME from surplus energy produced by their solar systems.  This has made it increasingly plausible for people to live "off the grid" and thereby to weaken the stranglehold that Edison has over the electrical needs of the people.  In some states, like Florida legal hurdles are being put up to prevent people from living off the grid.  This is primarily a matter of energy independence, not of the nation, but of individuals.  The more people who can supply their own power, the less energy companies like Edison remain necessary.  Ultimately, the energy companies will be rendered redundant, and collapse.  Therefore they fight to protect their monopoly on power, by lobbying the government to restrict access.

Big Oil is similarly invested in preventing Solar Energy from taking hold.  The burgeoning solar industry threatens Big Oil's longevity.  Since there is such potential for people to acquire surplus energy, this creates an incentive towards the predominance of electric cars over those run on gasoline.  If solar panels continue to be made more efficient, each home could be able to supply enough power to consistently charge a car, effectively for free, making Big Oil similarly redundant.

The transition of such companies from the oil industry, or even from the traditional forms of electricity into solar companies would only be a stopgap measure.   For a good long while, there will be a market for solar energy as people become energy independent one by one.  The technology will inevitably become cheaper and more efficient to produce and install, making it more commercially available even for lower income families.  Ultimately, it will reach the point where Solar is simply cheaper and better than paying the energy company, and the return on investment will come sooner and to a greater degree.  The rate of homeowners switching to solar will increase exponentially.  There will come a point at which there is too much independent energy, let's call it "Energy Critical Mass."  When we reach this Energy Critical Mass, there is no longer any social need for an energy company.  It serves no purpose.  Neighborhoods will at this point produce so much energy that charging money for it becomes an utter absurdity.  With this advent comes the complete energy independence, not only of the nation from foreign oil reserves, but indeed of most individuals from energy companies altogether. 

This form of economic and energy independence of the average citizen will be a tremendous democratizing force.  It will eventually level the playing field in a significant way.  When those living in poverty, or on the edge of it, are freed from their bondage to monthly utilities bills and gas expenditures, they will achieve unprecedented freedoms, in terms of freedom of movement and self-reliance.  They will be able to freely relocate to where their skills are most valued, shifting the balance of bargaining power in the employer/employee dynamic in favor of the worker, weakening the hold bosses can have over those working under them.  Employers who offer lower wages or fail to offer benefits will risk losing their workers, whose poverty once forced them to accept what work they could get where they were, not only to locally competitive rivals, but to rivals at great distance as well.  They will ultimately have no recourse but to adequately and humanely see to the wellbeing of their workers.  Capitalism will be required to adopt a conscience or die. 

It is my belief that this in inevitable.  Government action on behalf of electric or Big Oil lobbies, the restriction and holding back of research and development regarding solar energy can only forestall this eventuality.  They can hold it off for a time, perhaps even a very long time, but sooner or later it MUST come to pass that the people at large will be freed from the yoke of their masters.  As they gain one freedom they will demand another, until all chains have been broken.  It is only a question of when?

Vote Love

I came across this wonderful video today, and simply had to share.  I got to the end, and just felt a deep need to watch it again.  I cried both times.  I have had a very hard week, and this message was exactly what I needed.  We all need to stand up for love, every day, every moment.

Back From Hiatus

I disappeared for a while, around the time I was moving into a new apartment.  Now I am back, and I may be spotty for a while, as things are still getting sorted out, but I am back from my hiatus, and will be back writing posts on the state of our evolution here in America very soon.

Terrorism is a lie.

Do I have your attention?  Good.  Now let me explain.

I do not mean to say that terrorism does not exist.  What I DO mean to say is that we fed a series of major distortions, lies, and misinformation on the nature, degree, and scope of the so-called "Terrorist Threat."

The numbers are staggering.  Though some of the details may be disputed, picked at, or wheedled over, we kill each other at a rate that makes the feeble efforts of extremists statistically insignificant, and gives the lie to the histrionics of the right wing war hawks seeking to embroil us further in petty endless conflicts in the middle east.

Take a look at the statistics from 2013 (since they proved relatively easy to find).  More than twice as many people were killed by toddlers in the United States than by terrorists.  It's official: babies are a bigger threat to national security than ISIL.  Why then, are our politicians and news media making such a big deal about it then?

Power.

It is all about power and control.  Ben Franklin (yes THAT Ben Franklin) is quoted saying "They who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety,"  with the oft-given addendum to this being "...and will lose both."  And haven't we?  How much have we given up for this War on Terror?  How many Trillions has our government funneled into the Middle East?  How many multitudes of people are under almost constant surveillance?  How many heaps and mountains worth of data do the FBI and NSA have on all of us?

But the Republican party has doubled down so far on scapegoating Islamic Terrorism for all of our problems, or at the very least exaggerating their threat to such an extent that other issues are pegged as insignificant.  The Democrats, though not as heavily invested in the issue of Terrorism, have been complicit in allowing it to dominate.  The left has been dragged ever further to the right, to the point that the establishment will not challenge the GOP on their definition of Terrorism and its place in the political discussion. 

Now the FBI is cracking down on High School students, to take away more civil liberties, and gain even more control.   If this trend continues, and speech critical of the government will be labeled as dangerous as suspect.  Anyone who dares to speak out will be investigated or even imprisoned.  We can't allow it to happen. 

American Evolution: an Exegesis

For those who are curious; you may be many, or you may be nonexistent, in which case I am speaking into a void, I thought I'd explain in detail what I intended when I chose to title this blog "American Evolution." As is done with scripture, I chose to look at each word individually, in addition to their connection to each other.

American: This is easy.  I will be focusing on American issues.  The news I look into, respond to, and talk about is American, or at the very least affects America or Americans.

Evolution: Yes, I adhere to the theory of evolution.  If a better supported and incompatible theory supersedes this as a viable alternative, I may reconsider, but I don't consider religious texts to be hard evidence against this theory.  However, this is not solely concerned with the past and the origins of our species, but also with where we are going; how I see American culture developing, for better or worse.

Now for the two words together.

American Evolution: It is my hope to highlight, and perform my small part to advance, the evolution of America beyond the current state of today.  It is to point out the areas in need of improvement, and highlight a direction to head in, or a path to follow, as I see it.  I desire to see an evolution of consciousness in the American people.  I want to see a people who is educated, and capable of critical thinking.

We've reached a point in American society where we no longer trust our elected representatives to, well, represent us.  The prominence of political "outsiders" like Bernie Sanders (and yes, Donald Trump) are a testament to this growing zeitgeist.  Unfortunately, even amid the backdrop of this awakening to the corruption and disdain of the establishment for the desires and passions of its constituency (which I sincerely hope is a true awakening, with lasting repercussions, rather than a venting of steam into which will be spent the revolutionary fervor, allowing us to settle anew into the familiar complacency of lassitude and despondency) we as a people fall short, for even in the glimpsing of it, we lack the acumen to put that realization to good use.  This is by design.  It is also the hurdle I wish to see us surmount, and play out my little role in boosting us over.

Right now what unites American is a sense of pervasive dissatisfaction, but with what or whom, we are divided.  We have noticed that the narrative we are being fed does not make sense; we've dimly grasped that we are dreaming, but in that foggy way that does us little good.  We are trying to wake up, or at least learn to dream lucidly, but we lack the skills, and they are pumping us full of tranquilizers and anesthetics to keep us under.  It's time to pull out the morphine drip, and face reality.


It is no accident that this is but one letter away from American Revolution.  I see the process of evolution as an inherently revolutionary act.  We must change the way we see the world and interact with it.  If we do that, the status quo cannot remain intact.  Many of us, myself included, are strongly attached to the idea of America.  This attachment to the idea often causes us to don the rose-colored glasses with regards to the truth of America, and the truth is that we are not what we claim to be.  In a sense, we never have been.  Some of you may have the urge to shout epithets at the screen upon reading that, and if it were the end of the thought, I might even say you were justified; but it's not the end of the thought.  Because our history is a tangled mess of people who have been trying to be what we claim to be; and those who beat the drum louder than anyone else, while marching against the tide of history and the values that they would claim to represent.

Part of growing up is accepting the delusions an romantic misconceptions of your childhood.  Despite all of our self-righteous chest-slapping over our moral superiority, our history is filled with some of the worst atrocities in history.  Slavery, the Trail of Tears, the internment of Japanese Americans, mass incarceration, these are only a prominent few.  They need not define us, but we cannot pretend they are not a part of who we are as a nation.  They continue to shape us even now.  Racism did not end with Martin Luther King Jr.  Upton Sinclair didn't forever stop industry from mistreating its workers.  Women's suffrage did not win them equality.

The process of cultural evolution must be accompanied by a wide-spread personal evolution.  It is the responsibility of each of us to become better than we are.  It is our responsibility to pay attention and observe the world around us; our city, our state, our nation, and hold it accountable for being what we deserve it to be.

Humanism: Physiological Needs

Humanist psychology, in line with humanist philosophy, chooses to examine people holistically, as a person who is more than the sum of their behaviors and experiences, and capable of great things, with an inward drive towards actualization.  It rejects previous deterministic models of human psychology by examining a person's subjective reality and perspective, and accounting for that person's free will.  It assumes a multitiered model of the prerequisites for humanity to be able to achieve that psychological imperative.  When the needs of each level have been met, the human may progress to the next stage of psychological achievement.  Each progressive stage cannot be reached, or at least not maintained, without a solid foundation of the lower order requirements.  If a person's basic needs are not being met, then they cannot fulfill their potential.  Today we will be talking about the most basic needs of humanity, the physiological.

A representation of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs, By J. Finkelstein - I created this work using Inkscape., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=1315147

Physiological

As with any structure, if the base is weak, or incomplete, the structure will collapse.  Humanities most basic physiological needs form the foundation of the pyramid.  People cannot possibly live actualized lives, or have a sense of belonging and esteem if they do not have food to eat or a place to live.  It is essential for the functioning of an ethical society to provide for its people the basic physiological necessities of life.  Therefore, I view these as natural rights belonging to all people, not as granted by god, but by virtue of their humanity and the intrinsic.  Therefore the state is required to protect these human rights.

• Breathing: Duh
• Food and Water:  Everyone deserves food, without question.  As a natural right, I view this as one of the unalienable rights referred to in the Declaration of Independence.  Nothing takes away a person's right to food and water.   If a person cannot provide for their own feeding, then they must be fed.  I would oppose as a human rights violation any attempt to abridge the food stamp program that did not supplant it with a superior system.  This includes drug testing.  The use of, even addiction to, drugs cannot deprive a person of the right to eat.  Everyone deserves food, not matter the circumstances.
• Sex: Simply put, all humans of sexual maturity experience sexuality, and must be required to express that sexuality unpunished.  This includes all expressions of sexuality between mature and consenting individuals; man and woman, man and man, woman and woman, masturbation, abstinence, and any other.  It must be stressed that the right to abstain from sex is as integral to physiological needs as the right to sex itself.  Abstinence in this case can mean from sex as a whole, or from any undesired act thereof at any given instance.  Consent to sex on one instance does not imply consent to sex on another instance.  Consent can be given and withdrawn at will. 
• Sleep: Simple put, while no one can or should be legally required to sleep, most particularly not at any specified time, every human is entitled by right of humanity to sleep 8 hours a day should they desire it.  From a practical standpoint, this places an upper limit on the length of any legal work day. 
• Homeostasis: Scientifically, this refers to a sort of biological equilibrium amounting to freedom from excess heat and cold, and other factors.  From a practical standpoint, this refers to two things: clothes and shelter.  All people are entitled to a home address, and clothes to wear.  Chronic homelessness is unacceptable.  An argument could also be made that the right to homeostasis includes healthcare as a means of achieving that homeostasis.  This is, in fact, the position of the World Health Organization.
• Excretion: We all piss and shit.  Deal with it.  It's a right.  People who make you pay to use the toilet are jerks.

Implications

If we accept the premise that the aforementioned physiological needs of humanity are basic human rights, and the premise that it is the duty and purpose of government to defend human rights (such would be in keeping with the Enlightenment ideals in which the United States of America was formed), then it must naturally be concluded that the above needs of humanity must be met, and that it is the duty and purpose of government to ensure that they are met.  

I would also posit that if we are to hold to the ideals of the Founding Fathers, that the "unalienable rights" to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" guarantees us the right to pursue our greatest happiness--the elevation of ourselves to the pinnacle of our being; our true selves and our fullest potential.  It would be, in a sense, to evolve.

Humanism: What a Piece of Work is a Man!

I go by Renaissance Man on here in part because I believe in the principles of humanism, which first became popular during the Italian Renaissance, which proceeded to sweep throughout Europe and changed the entire way we conceive of ourselves and our place in the world.  I believe in the idea that human beings have inherent value, which doesn’t require God or the church to validate via some special code of action dictated from on high.  People have value because of what we are. 

“'What a piece of work is a man! How noble in reason, how infinite in faculty! In form and moving how express and admirable! In action how like an Angel! In apprehension how like a god!”

This famous line from Shakespeare’s Hamlet sums up the humanist understanding of humanity.  Comparing us to angels and gods highlights the limitless capacity of human potential.   The ideal of the Renaissance Man was one who pushed themselves to be all that they could.  They explored every aspect of their abilities, refusing to limit themselves to one job, or one narrow focus for their life, and to become complete, whole, to strive for greatness.  In a sense, it was a push for personal evolution.  Not the evolution of species Darwin spoke of, taking place across millennia, but a microcosm; an individual transformation and elevation across a lifetime.  In a time of complacency, mediocrity, and a culture of lies, misinformation, and anti-intellectual tendencies, it is an outlook I believe to be sorely needed.

Hamlet’s speech is underscored with a certain irony that belies the lofty language and high praise he utters.  The Danish Prince speaks the ideal, but it is not what he sees.  Indeed, we all fall short, and one need only look around to know that most people are not “infinite in faculty.” But we could be.  Each one of us has it within us to be better than we are.  That is our essential nature.  I think it MUST define us as a people if we are going to survive.  I do not see this as a sappy inspirational message, of the sort commonly shared on facebook and pinterest, but instead a moral (I might go so far as to say logical) imperative, and a part of our social contract as human beings belonging to a society.  We affect others merely by existing, and we change the world each time we draw breath.  Society only functions if we agree to treat each other by ethical standards, and functions at its best as a whole when we are at our own personal best.

It is therefore our social duty to self-actualize, and to allow each other to do the same. 

Sing Out For Bernie: "Hey Bernie Sanders"

Here comes another one.  While not especially new, it was new to me when I discovered it the other day.  Brian Estes of youtube channel homemadechickn brings us a modern folk song about our favorite socialist.  Furthermore, he's announced that the song is "common property of anyone who wishes to sing it, share it, whatever," which makes is perfect for a Sing Out, for a rally, a protest, a phone-bank party, or any occasion that moves you to sing along to this tune.

He praises the Vermont Senator with straightforward lyrics and and simple chords, played on the banjo, while you can gaze out his rear window at the forest in the background.  The "grassroots" essence of Bernie's political movement is apparent in this video, in more ways than one.

It's a charming little ditty that is bound to stick in your head, & echoes older populist movements, awakening the spirit of Woody Guthrie and (more recently) the 60s protest songs of Bob Dylan and his ilk.  This is appropriate considering the political and socioeconomic climate of the US today.  We are coming out of a recession that may well have been the worst economic collapse in the US since the Great Depression, and the nation today shows many parallels to he 1960s.  The Black Lives Matter movement echoes, and could learn a great deal from, the Black Panther Party.  The wars in Iraq & Afghanistan, with no end in sight, alongside the threat of more war in Syria has drawn protest and upheaval at home not seen since Vietnam.  And once more, women's sexuality is in question, and women are trying to assert their right to own their bodies and to do with them as they see fit.  All of these parallels make Estes' music seem very timely and appropriate.

Sing Out for Bernie:
"Feel the Bern"
"Talk Bernie to Me"

Pledging Allegiance

A few years ago, a push to remove the words "under God" from the Pledge of Allegiance stirred up controversy relating to the relationship of church and state, and whether the technically-not-mandatory-but-do-what's-expected-of-you pledge in school was a violation of religious freedom.  Spoiler alert: they didn't take it out.

There is a bigger issue than the tacked-on "under God" in the rote recitation of the Pledge: the REST of the pledge.  Let's break it down.

"I pledge allegiance..."
The term allegiance is derived from its root word "liege," which Merriam-Webster defines as: "having the right to feudal allegiance or service" or "obligated to render feudal allegiance and service." Dictionary.com defines the noun liege as "a feudal lord entitled to allegiance and service" and the adjective form as "owing primary allegiance and service to a feudal lord."  Merriam Webster defines allegiance itself as "the obligation of a feudal vassal to his liege lord."

At least I'm not a serf.  Those guys are fucked!

The feudal system is antithetical to the principles of the American government.  The keeping of the people in serfdom by a king and his appointed lords and vassals constitutes a form of slavery which is thoroughly incompatible with the concept of liberty, and with the foundations of the United States of America.  The Declaration of Independence states that:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. 

The key phrase here is "from the consent of the governed."  It is the very basis of the American system that the government is only legitimate through the consent of the American people.  As a form of republican government, meaning that the vox populi is the true ruler of the state, and that is expressed by the people's chosen representatives, who rule in their name with with their voice.  If the people are displeased, they are within their rights and powers to remove that representative from office.  But if the people are "obligated to render feudal service" then they are not free citizens.  And to whom are they promising this service?

"...to the flag of the United States of America."

To the Flag.  Not the people, or even the nation itself, but the symbol of that nation.   An argument can be made that this is a usage of metonymy, and the flag stands in for, and even means the United States as a whole.  That is all well and good, but placing undo reverence on the symbol can lead to a distancing from the reality of the thing itself.

Symbols are used by those who understand their power.  Because we have invested so much energy into The Flag--every child in America has chanted their promise of service to it every morning at school for years and years and years--politicians use this fixation on the flag and can very easily confound and assail our senses by using this symbol as a shield to deflect suspicion.  You can see this in display when candidates for office wear prominent flag pins, or more extremely, by competing over who can display the most, or the biggest flags.

Do you think he's compensating for something?

"...and to the Republic for which it stands..."
Oh right, there's actually a government!  So we are also pledging to serve the republic; the system of representative government meant to serve us.  Hey wait a minute...

Yes.  They've actually gotten us to turn it around in our heads so that instead of making the government promise to serve the American people, the people promise daily to serve the government.  And this happens on a daily basis throughout the nation at our schools, at an age when we are at our most malleable and impressionable.  Something sounds hinky.

Abby's on it!  McGee is there too.

"...one nation under God..."
Ok, so this one is divisive.  Some people like it and will bristle if you try to take it out.  Apparently these people represent a majority of some sort.  At least in government.  But while there isn't anything objectionable as such in "one nation," the phrase "under God" is another matter.  The phrase was added in 1954 by congressional legislation which is a violation of the First Amendment, which states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."  Why does this violate the amendment?  Because it gives national respect to the idea of god which is present in many, but not all religions.  It imposes upon American patriotism a religious hue, and not just in general, but specifically monotheistic religion.  Furthermore, this is not simply stating the existence of such a god, but that the United States is a nation under that god; subservient to him.  If the nation was meant to be religious in nature, and meant to be second to the will of God there would have been some mention of god or religion somewhere in the US Constitution.  There isn't.  Don't believe me?  Go look for it.  I'll wait.

"...indivisible..."
Well...

Secession didn't work.  We had a whole Civil War about it.  Though technically if you have tens of thousands of Americans killing each other en masse over whether the nation can be divided or not, isn't the nation already divided?  So are we talking about legally here?  Because that's true-ish if you're assuming that the United States is eternal or something, but chances are that some day; years, centuries down the line, it will cease to be, and then all bets are off.

They certainly can't mean politically.  The whole basis of the US was so that there could be disagreement politically.  And while George Washington might have told us not to form political parties, we didn't listen.  Now Americans are SUPER divisible!  They divide along party lines, issues, and Donald Trump's hair.

You're responsible!  You're the one to blame!  It's YOUR FAULT!

"...with liberty and justice for all."
That's cute.  It's just not true.

It's incredibly naive to think, much less chant as a daily ritual, that everyone actually gets liberty and justice in America, just by virtue of the fact that this is America.  Regarding liberty, that is becoming questionable in the ever-more-police-state-looking modern day America.  Since the Patriot Act (at least) the government has been spying on us & accumulating information to determine whether we are good loyal citizens or not, and since the NDAA the Feds can hold you indefinitely and without charges on the suspicion of terrorism.  This is not to mention that the US leads the world in mass incarceration.  We have more prisons than colleges, and some for-profit prisons are now suing the government for not providing enough prisoners.  That's right, there is actually a demand for prisoners.  A whole industry around making sure that large numbers of citizens are locked up, and making sure that we have enough citizens locked up.  It's disgusting that we have an industry that creates this kind of demand for crime and punishment.

Don't get me started on justice!  Was there justice for Tamir Rice and his family?  Not only the the police officer shoot dead an innocent twelve year old boy on sight, but the state actually sued his family for the cost of the ambulance.  Insult to injury much?  And the officer involved was never even tried for the unnecessary killing.  Let me make sure that is understood: he wasn't found not guilty in court, he was never taken to court at all.  They just refused to investigate.  And that's just ONE of the many many cases of injustice throughout America, so to say that this is a land that achieves liberty and justice for everyone is just a lie.

So there is something problematic with almost every part of the Pledge, not just those two little words that have received so much of the attention, but we continue to, if not force then at least coerce, our students to repeat it day, after day, after day, often without really knowing why they are doing it, or what it is they are really pledging.  We need to rethink the pledge.  

Humanist Manifesto III

Following is the Humanist Manifesto III

It is revised from the first humanist manifesto, penned in 1933.  I do not own this.  Humanist Manifesto is a trademark of the American Humanist Association-© 2003 American Humanist Association

Humanism is a progressive philosophy of life that, without supernaturalism, affirms our ability and responsibility to lead ethical lives of personal fulfillment that aspire to the greater good of humanity.
The lifestance of Humanism—guided by reason, inspired by compassion, and informed by experience—encourages us to live life well and fully. It evolved through the ages and continues to develop through the efforts of thoughtful people who recognize that values and ideals, however carefully wrought, are subject to change as our knowledge and understandings advance.
This document is part of an ongoing effort to manifest in clear and positive terms the conceptual boundaries of Humanism, not what we must believe but a consensus of what we do believe. It is in this sense that we affirm the following:

• Knowledge of the world is derived by observation, experimentation, and rational analysis. Humanists find that science is the best method for determining this knowledge as well as for solving problems and developing beneficial technologies. We also recognize the value of new departures in thought, the arts, and inner experience—each subject to analysis by critical intelligence.
• Humans are an integral part of nature, the result of unguided evolutionary change. Humanists recognize nature as self-existing. We accept our life as all and enough, distinguishing things as they are from things as we might wish or imagine them to be. We welcome the challenges of the future, and are drawn to and undaunted by the yet to be known.
• Ethical values are derived from human need and interest as tested by experience. Humanists ground values in human welfare shaped by human circumstances, interests, and concerns and extended to the global ecosystem and beyond. We are committed to treating each person as having inherent worth and dignity, and to making informed choices in a context of freedom consonant with responsibility.
• Life's fulfillment emerges from individual participation in the service of humane ideals. We aim for our fullest possible development and animate our lives with a deep sense of purpose, finding wonder and awe in the joys and beauties of human existence, its challenges and tragedies, and even in the inevitability and finality of death. Humanists rely on the rich heritage of human culture and the lifestance of Humanism to provide comfort in times of want and encouragement in times of plenty.
• Humans are social by nature and find meaning in relationships. Humanists long for and strive toward a world of mutual care and concern, free of cruelty and its consequences, where differences are resolved cooperatively without resorting to violence. The joining of individuality with interdependence enriches our lives, encourages us to enrich the lives of others, and inspires hope of attaining peace, justice, and opportunity for all.
• Working to benefit society maximizes individual happiness. Progressive cultures have worked to free humanity from the brutalities of mere survival and to reduce suffering, improve society, and develop global community. We seek to minimize the inequities of circumstance and ability, and we support a just distribution of nature's resources and the fruits of human effort so that as many as possible can enjoy a good life.

Humanists are concerned for the well being of all, are committed to diversity, and respect those of differing yet humane views. We work to uphold the equal enjoyment of human rights and civil liberties in an open, secular society and maintain it is a civic duty to participate in the democratic process and a planetary duty to protect nature's integrity, diversity, and beauty in a secure, sustainable manner.
Thus engaged in the flow of life, we aspire to this vision with the informed conviction that humanity has the ability to progress toward its highest ideals. The responsibility for our lives and the kind of world in which we live is ours and ours alone.