In the review of fifty years of IHEU history, what stands out? We will attempt to indicate some of the most conspicuous trends.

The very fact that the International Humanist and Ethical Union celebrates its fiftieth anniversary this year, is in hindsight no small miracle, in view of the near-continuous problems that have threatened its survival: persistent financial restrictions, difficult communications with member organizations, dependency on a few motivated individuals, and a crisis in the mid-1990s.

In the 1950s and 1960s the Dutch played a crucial role in guaranteeing the continuance of the organization. Without the leadership of Jaap van Praag and the office support and repeated emergency financial injections from the Dutch HV,it is hardly conceivable how IHEU might have survived its infancy. In the 1980s and 1990s the Americans and Norwegians were similarly vital in keeping IHEU alive by means of their financial support and their personal involvement. These came at a time when the IHEU bureau in the Netherlands came to function less satisfactorily, and when in addition the general support for IHEU within the Netherlands weakened because of internal developments within Dutch humanism. The increasing financial contribution from the US and Norwegian member organizations in particular was paralleled by a shifting balance within IHEU between the various views of humanism. Conducive to this development was the growth of both the number and the diversity of the organizations participating in IHEU. This increasing internationalization in itself is a consequence of concerted efforts to invest in development in the Third World, while making use of opportunities offered by the Dutch Humanist Institute for Development Cooperation (HIVOS).

In spite of a sustained long-term rise in both membership and budget, lack of finances and personnel remain a constant problem. In comparison with religious movements such as the churches, or single-issue movements such as Greenpeace, a life stance movement like IHEU has a hard task attracting large memberships. When problems arose, member organizations have in the past often used their subscription fee as a means of exerting pressure. Another weak point is IHEU's heavily depending on the capacities and motivation of a very small number of paid staff and dedicated volunteers.

Market niches have sometimes helped IHEU to achieve successes. Notable examples are the series of IHEU/HIVOS programs for development projects in the Third World. IHEU's offering a non-religious channel for such projects made it interesting to HIVOS, while at the same time both the spirit of the projects and the possible creation of a humanist network made them interesting to IHEU. These co-projects also illustrate a trend from theory to practice that is visible in IHEU's history: at first the purpose of these projects was educating Third World intellectuals by teaching them 'European' humanism; now they are much more oriented to local needs. IHEU's public statements show the same trend from theory to practice: though long-pondered theoretical statements have not completely disappeared, fast reactions to current events have become more frequent. Connecting theoretical philosophy and practical acting is a central theme at the 2002 World Congress.

One important aspect that we have been unable to investigate, is the influence of national contexts within IHEU. It is very clear that humanism and its tradition in the United States differs from that in the Netherlands, or Norway, or India, or Nigeria ... and so on. How do these differences become visible in IHEU, and how do they interact? Can we add to the dialogues with Catholics, Marxists and Buddhists an 'internal-humanist dialogue'?

A final question is, what has IHEU achieved? 25 years ago Jaap van Praag was pessimistic as to its record. At international bodies like the United Nations or the European Community IHEU's successes have only been incidental, even though this is considered a core activity. The number of individual supporters of IHEU has always been small and large parts of the world are virtually devoid of humanism. Even in Western countries IHEU's influence on national laws concerning for example equal treatment of religious and non-religious people, or 'sensitive' rights such as those concerning homosexuality, abortion, or euthanasia, has not been overwhelming. However, the last few years have witnessed increased activity and an increased dynamics on the side of IHEU. Using modern electronic media, IHEU has been able to react swiftly to various developments. It is supporting a series of projects in the Third World and in Eastern Europe in which human rights and human values are central. It also has in various ways supported individuals whose human rights were threatened. IHEU has organized or contributed to a series of international conferences in fields that matter to humanists. Its efforts to become an active international movement now are very serious. The increase in media coverage it has achieved brings with it increased opportunities to show what humanists stand for. IHEU's activity at the European and United Nations organizations has been recognized and appreciated. With some caution-many of the long-standing problems are still there-this may be regarded as promising.

---

International Humanist and Ethical Union 1952-2002
Past, present and future
Bert Gasenbeek and Babu Gogineni (eds.)
Copyright © 2002 by De Tijdstroom uitgeverij.
Republished 2006 at http://www.iheu.org with permission
ISBN 90 5898 041 3 nur 730, 740
This book has been semi-automatically reformatted to fit this web site. Please tell us of any formatting errors that you encounter.
The entire book is also available, with illustrations, as a PDF ebook on this web site.