Human Rights Are at a Crossroads. Here’s Why the U.S. Needs to Reclaim Moral Leadership.

Moral Relativism Weakens Human Rights
Moral relativism weakens human rights by reducing them to social constructs, subjecting them to shifting political agendas instead of anchoring them in universal truths. Authoritarian regimes exploit cultural relativism to justify suppressing dissent. This was seen in China’s repression of Uyghur Muslims or Russia’s crackdowns on political opposition under the guise of protecting sovereignty. When human rights are treated as something contingent, instead of inherent, protecting them becomes unreliable. In such cases, those in positions of power can decide when, how, and to whom these rights apply. This inconsistency harms the most vulnerable populations.

The Case for Universal Principles
The fundamental moral order that undergirds all just societies provides a necessary foundation for human rights. This is articulated in the natural law tradition, as expressed by Thomas Aquinas, who argued that human rights are intrinsic to human nature—not gifts from governments. This perspective aligns with America’s founding ideals, affirming that rights are endowed by our shared humanity, not contingent on political expediency. If U.S. foreign policy aims to be a credible advocate for human rights, it must return to this principled foundation.

Prioritizing collective well-being ensures that rights are upheld in ways that promote social stability, justice, and the protection of the most vulnerable. A natural law framework situates rights within a moral order that nurtures both individual and communal well-being, offering a stable foundation for defending human dignity.

Practical Applications in U.S. Foreign Policy
U.S. human rights advocacy should focus not just on abstract freedoms but on concrete policies that uphold human dignity. Efforts to combat human trafficking, religious persecution, and authoritarian oppression should be framed as moral imperatives rooted in universal values. This approach builds credibility with global audiences who share these convictions, transcending ideological divides.

A natural law approach can effectively bridge ideological and cultural divides, fostering collaboration between diverse groups, including faith-based organizations and secular human rights advocates. By framing human rights as part of an objective moral order—one that transcends cultural and religious boundaries—the U.S. can forge stronger alliances, particularly with nations that embrace moral and philosophical traditions aligned with universal principles.

The Role of Storytelling in Human Rights Advocacy
Just as effective diplomacy must be rooted in enduring principles to inspire moral leadership, impactful storytelling draws on universal truths to mobilize people toward action. Whether shaping foreign policy or shaping public consciousness, the key lies in connecting with values that transcend political fluctuations—values like human dignity, justice, and the common good. At Wondros, we’ve seen firsthand how anchoring narratives in these principles can drive meaningful change. 

Reclaiming Moral Leadership
For the U.S. to maintain its global human rights leadership, it must be rooted in enduring moral principles rather than transient political ideologies. Anchoring human rights in an objective moral order ensures consistency, reinforcing credibility as a principled advocate for justice. In a time when human rights are under threat from authoritarian regimes and ideological fragmentation, it is imperative to establish a foundation that is both intellectually robust and universally resonant. The U.S. must reclaim moral leadership, championing justice with conviction and strategic purpose.

At Wondros, we’re committed to amplifying stories that uphold these principles, inspiring action and fostering global change.