The issue at hand.

On this seventieth anniversary of A Humanist Manifesto, we publish Humanism and Its Aspirations. This new document sums up the central principles that underlie the Humanist philosophy and approach to life, and expresses the Humanist commitment to a better world. As the introductory article to it notes, many Humanist values and ideals "have never been more urgently needed." Already, an impressive list of notable Humanists, including seventeen Nobel laureates, have added their endorsement with additional prominent signers being added continually.

This issue of the Humanist also comes at a time when the U.S. government is waging war while much of the rest of the world is waging peace. Indeed, peace activists have been on a high state of alert for more than a year now. The peace initiative is therefore preemptive: instead of emerging only after a war has gone on for years, as was the case with Vietnam, this peace movement was launched with the specific intent of preventing a conflict.

We are witness, in fact, to the largest, most continuous, and most widespread peace demonstrations in history. As Norman Solomon points out in his "Media Beat" column on page thirty-five, this isn't the version of globalism George W. Bush had in mind. Moreover, the effort isn't merely part of a political struggle, it's part of a dialogue. Robert Muller, former assistant secretary general of the United Nations and chancellor emeritus of the University of Peace in Costa Rica, recently put it this way: "Never before in the history of the world has there been a global, visible, public, viable, open dialogue and conversation about the very legitimacy of war." He added, "This is what `waging peace' looks like."

We continue that process with two articles, starting on page fifteen, exploring the concept of a just war and arguing that, under established standards developed since antiquity together with modern canons of international law, the current invasion of Iraq doesn't clear the bar. We also publish U.S. Senator Robert Byrd's February 12, 2003, address to the U.S. Senate in which, like a prophet crying in the wilderness, he warns of the dangers ahead.

Leading up to the invasion of Iraq, the publisher of this magazine--the American Humanist Association--issued two pointed statements. The first opposes "the unprovoked initiation of hostilities" in that country and the second calls on the UN Security Council and the U.S. Congress to exercise the necessary courage to "vigorously intervene and stop this unprovoked aggression against the people of Iraq before it begins." Both of these positions, though in the realm of the humanly possible, weren't in the realm of the politically probable. The AHA knew this. But it was important that there be no implied assent projected through silence.

Opposing the war, however, isn't enough. George Lakoff, writing for AlterNet on March 18, 2003, argues that the antiwar movement must do more than just say what it is against. It must declare what it is for. That is, "it must have a clearly articulated moral vision, with values rather than mere interests determining its political direction." It needs to powerfully advance progressive ideals. That is where the concepts expressed in Humanism and Its Aspirations come to bear. Its vision is clear: "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."

In future issues of the Humanist it will be our task to apply the ideas of Humanism and Its Aspirations to shaping a better tomorrow. We are aided in this venture by the most gratifying trend of our time: the global clamor for peace, freedom, and justice.