I was a humanist before I knew I was a humanist. By the time I was eleven years old, I had already formed the belief that gods were not for me. Not the god of the Jewish religion, nor of the Christian. At thirteen, as I stood before the synagogue congregation giving my Bar Mitzvah speech and declaring my manhood, I silently vowed that as a man I would, from that moment on, make my own decisions in life. And my first decision, while still standing on the synagogue dais, was never again to enter a temple of organized worship.

Of course, it was a foolish vow. Out of respect to relatives and friends I have since entered synagogues and churches many times on many occasions. But never have I entered to pray to a god. Never! I admit it took a few years to rid my conscience of its programmed unease at being godless. But when the vengeful god of the Hebrews didn't strike me down for lack of faith, I laid my conscience to rest.

Today, my belief in reason and logic as the guiding light of humanity remains stronger than ever, for I now know, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that the decision was the right one, that I am unquestionably a "humanist," and that there are millions more like me on planet Earth.

As I write this, I am 70 years old. Although long aware of humanist organizations, I haven't joined; I'm not a joiner. Nor have I ever had an urge to convince my friends to discard their religious superstitions. Their philosophy of life is none of my business. For many years I was content to adhere to the principle of rugged individualism—which I now realize is nothing more than Establishment propaganda—and to steer my own course through the ocean of life.

In 1970, when I was forty years old and the traumatic Vietnam War was still dragging on, I realized with a shock that my two young boys, although only seven and nine years old, would soon be approaching draft age. The thought scared me and changed my life forever. I began to think about why some Americans hold the power to send other Americans off to die in unexplainable and unwanted wars. I couldn't conceive such a thing being possible in a real democracy in which the masses of common people truly hold the power of government.

I realized I didn't know much about the workings of the U.S. government or the precise definition of "democracy." Like many, if not most Americans, I didn't vote, for I believed politicians to be a breed apart—opportunists and liars—and that their seedy world of politics was unrelated to my life. I had always taken for granted the concept of democracy was related to the concept of freedom, but I didn't know with certainty.

It was then I began a search for meaning, and particularly the meaning of life. I soon became aware that lack of a college education was going to prove an obstacle. Year after year, I was driven by the urge to know answers to questions I should have known as a younger man, but I merely unearthed dozens of additional questions.

The quest went on decade after decade as I spent most of my free time, and untold hours, within the book racks of one or another library. During that time, I learned to use words a little, to write, and to use a computer. The penalty for such zeal, which I carried heavily, was to miss never-to be-had-again experiences with my wife and children.

Those years, caused me a great deal of bitterness and resentment toward the academic world—of which I consider organized humanism a part. For while I had to ferret out the informtion I sought, bit by bit from the pages of the past, men and women all around me possessed a far better knowledge of the past, and command of words. Surely, some possessed the knowledge I had struggled to find and knew the truths I had come to learn late in life. Why hadn't they alerted the rest of us? Why hadn't one of them written the book that begged to be written? Of, course, as I persevered, I eventually found many of these books.

Which brings me to the subject of this letter to humanists.

Over the years, I have become a sceptic of humanists and humanist organizations. Humanists claim to prefer reason and ethics as a way to better this world we live in. Yet, with national wealth and power amassed by so few U.S. citizens—a condition not much different than in totalitarian and monarchal societies— and with the disintegration of American ideals and standards, the increase of violence in the streets, and the mind polluting garbage and role models streaming from the media, humanists remain strangely preoccupied with the destructiveness of organized religions.

Yes, I know humanists include other ideals and objectives in their creeds and declarations but frankly, writing books and holding seminars and conventions often gives the impression humanists are nothing but a bunch of scholars talking to one other, hashing and rehashing the same old arguments.

Mere talk is not the way to make this a better world for the masses of common people. It's certainly not the way to motivate the changes in national values needed at this precise moment.

The ultimate function of the brain is to produce changes that overcome threats to survival, or obstacles to goals. A change of environment, change of location, change of beliefs, change of values. Physically making changes of some kind, and not merely forming conclusions, is what the human ability to think is all about.

Slip into the doorway to get out of the rain; move quickly to avoid getting hit by a falling rock, become a humanist if you are unhappy with the concept of spirits and gods, learn about computers if want to join the modern world and get a decent job. Change is what life itself is all about.

Why have humanists not used love of "\"reason" to reason that the quickest way to win members is not to confront or antagonize the unfortunates who have been programmed since childhood to remain superstitious and without faith in selves, but to offer them a change to a fairer and better life? When does reason recognize that better lives for commoners will never happen until participatory governments replace hierarchical governments.

Why is the general public still unaware there is such a category of people called "humanists," and why are millions of citizens unaware that, at heart, they are humanists? Where is the humanist voice in public affairs and public elections? Why isn't the truth that the technological conveniences people accept from the American System: the swift modes of communications and transportation; the overwhelming variety of foods; the dazzling choices of clothing styles; the various forms of entertainment and luxuries—all have been created for us by the men and women of science, not of religion.

If you haven't noticed, religious zealots are clamoring for political power—and winning. Doesn't that frighten you? If it had been left to the advocates of religion, we would still believe the Earth was the center of our universe, and not the sun. If it were left to the administrators of organized religions, there would be no humanism. no miracles of medicine and no modern conveniences such as the airplane, radio, and television. If you haven't noticed, astrology, superstition and the supernaturalism are gaining ground with the ignorant and insecure new generations: born and programmed by the American society to remain ignorant and insecure.

If religious zealots gain political power, how many wonderful books will never be published? How many more unwanted children will populate the Earth? How long will it take religious leaders to convert Americans back to a more primitive state, as Taliban zealots force the Afghan people?

If you haven't noticed, "big business" is rapidly taking over the portals to the internet and diverting the attention of Americans into the same trivial channels of sports, weather, and entertainment as the more traditional Establishment media has been doing for many years. Shouldn't humanists be doing something about this? Are you going to allow this brilliant technology to be taken from you without a fight; this technology with the potential to give working Americans the capability of direct participation in government without representatives; and with the potential to eliminate poverty, illiteracy, and war?

The reason working Americans accept this condition is that it's not a public issue. It's ignored, or minimized, by Establishment's media that must perpetuate the pretense the U.S. is a true working democracy, although in truth, it has never been other than a pseudo-democracy. These men, content in the belief that the American masses are docile and ignorant, rush to make themselves rulers of planet Earth. Whether or not they succeed depends upon the common masses of Earth.

I believe it's time for the next giant step in the evolution of human freedom. Reason says that working Americans should demand a change from representative democracy to participatory democracy. Shouldn't humanists publicly advocate this change? If you and all the other Americans who claim to be humanists don't sense the danger to our survival as a nation, and don't take direct action now when the danger of climate change and nuclear war threatens, why are you so proud of your reasoning abilities?

If you truly want to help Americans mature and have faith in selves, help them to fight a battle that will gain these objectives. Help them to fight the enemy who creates these iniquities. Help them to gain a victory that will make it possible to create a fairer, friendlier society, and help guide them in the fight against the collectors of excessive wealth and power. Help commoner Americans to fight bigness and its arrogant abuse of power. Help them to fight the American Establishment and the republic's abusive rulers!

A victory will give working Americans the opportunity to make this the kind of country they want. It will guarantee their children an essential education of relevant knowledge, and not the trivial knowledge fed them by an Establishment public educations system. An essential education, plus a properly structured participatory government, will automatically help to eliminate the ignorance and superstition of many Americans and pave the way for a fairer and more mature society.