Historical situation in which a younger generation struggles against the generation in power in order to modify the dominant anti-humanist framework. Such a period is often identified with social revolution. A h.m. acquires full significance if it inaugurates a stage in which successive generations can adapt and further develop the founding proposals of this process. Frequently, however, the h.m. is canceled by the very generation that came to power with the intention of producing a change of schema or system. It may also happen that the generation that initiates the h.m. will fail in its project. Some have wished to see in the social consciousness of certain cultures the presence of humanist moments represented by a person or group of persons who have attempted to institutionalize this h.m. from a position of power (whether political, religious, cultural, etc.) in an elitist way, “from the top down.” One of the more notable historical examples of this was Akhenaton in ancient Egypt. When he attempted to impose his reforms, there was an immediate reaction from the generation being displaced. All of the structural changes he had initiated were dismantled, which brought about, among other new circumstances, the exodus of certain peoples, who in their departure from the lands of Egypt carried with them the values of that h.m. In other cultures about which current knowledge is not extensive, this phenomenon can still be observed. For example, in pre-Columbian Mesoamerica, the Toltec governor of the city of Tula, Topiltzín, has been credited with the implanting of the humanist attitude called “toltecayotl.” A similar thing took place with Kukulkán, the ruler of Chichen-Itzá and founder of the city of Mayapán. Similarly, with Netzahualcóyotl in Texcoco we observe the opening of a new h.m. In pre-Colombian South America, a similar tendency appears in the Inca ruler Cuzi Yupanqui, who was given the name Pachacutéc, “reformer,” and in Tupac Yupanqui. The cases multiply as the information on cultures increases and, of course, as the linear historical account of the nineteenth century is challenged. So, too, has the influence of the great religious reformers and cultural heroes been interpreted as the opening of a h.m., which continued forward in a new stage and even at times a new civilization, but which have eventually come to an end, deviating from and annulling the initial direction. With the configuration of the single, closed global civilization (planetarization) that is now taking shape, it is no longer possible for a new h.m. to be inaugurated from the top down, of the summit of political, economic or cultural power. Rather, we believe a new h.m. will emerge as a consequence of the increasing disorder in today’s closed system, and that it will be protagonist by the social base, which, as it suffers the general destructing ,will have the possibility, driven by its immediate needs, of promoting the growth of small autonomous organizations. These specific actions today are in a position to convert themselves into a demonstration effects , thanks to the shrinking of space that is offered by technological development and, in particular, the growth of communications. The worldwide synchronization of protest of a small generational stratum in the 1960s and early 1970s was a symptom of this type of phenomena. Another case is that of the social upheavals, capable of synchronization between geographical points far removed from one another.