Here is why ‘human rights’ is a weak argument against Martial Law…

The better question would be: Is “human rights” still relevant in the Philippines? It is, if you are a Martial Law Crybaby who is throwing a tantrum over the recent declaration of Martial Law in Mindanao.

For “activists” who shriek “Bloody Murder!” at the mere mention of Martial Law, “human rights” is the be-all-end-all argument used to shut down any discussion on the topic. Human rights, after all, is an absolute of the human species these “activists” insist. It is a doctrine that the entire human race ought to enshrine in their respective governments’ charters. Once this unanimous bowing to this modern religion called “human rights” happens, the world, these “activists” say, will enjoy universal peace, prosperity, and harmony.

That’s the theory at least. It sounds good on paper. But can it be applied?

For that question to be answered, we need to dig deeper into the underlying assumptions that prop up the lofty notion of “human rights” that we have long taken for granted.

Here is the single biggest one and its single point of failure…

Human rights is an absolute universal truth about humanity.

If we believe that this assumption is true, then we may as well believe in everything written in the Holy Bible — or for that matter, any body of writing held sacred by any organised hierarchical religion. Our belief in bibles on “human rights” — whether this be one authored by “international bodies” like the United Nations, Human Rights Watch, or one New Age preacher or the other follows the same cognitive model that once upon a time held up the Christian Bible as an indisputable and infallible source of truth.

The trouble with this thinking model is that it traps people into a fatal circular logic — belief in so-called “absolutes” that are propped up by mere appeals to authority. As long as the brand equities of, say, the UN, the Human Rights Watch, or the latest celebrity endorser remain influential to a critical mass of believers, the mythologies propagated by these organisations or individuals are perceived to be gospel truths. It’s no different to how the gods of Mount Olympus were once real to the ancient Greeks, or how medieval peasants once believed that tickets to the Gates of Heaven can be purchased from friars through “indulgences”, or how we once thought that we’d wake up blind if we went to bed while our hair was still wet after a shower.

The reality is, depending on which head of state or tribal chieftain you ask, the notion of “human rights” is relative. Governments giveth human rights and governments taketh away human rights. When a government revokes “human rights”, say when Martial Law is declared because certain liberties are being abused, individuals do not have a higher power to appeal to who will defend their perceived entitlement to their “human rights”.

Entitlement to “human rights” is only as good as a critical mass of popular appeal backing the notion.

In the case of Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte’s declaration of Martial Law over the island of Mindanao, that writ is effective on the following bases:

(1) It was declared by a popularly-elected national chief executive;

(2) It is made legal by a clause in a Constitution that was ratified by popular vote in a national plebiscite; and,

(3) It can be upheld (or, perhaps, overruled) by a Congress of popularly-elected representatives.

In short, everything and everyone that makes the current declaration of Martial Law over Mindanao valid is its popular appeal and the popularity of the people who direct it, enforce it, and endorse it. That’s democracy. If there are limits to the application and effectivity of Martial Law in its current form, those limits can be changed or even revoked. No problem at all in a democracy. All that needs to be done is for popular will to be marshalled around such an initiative; say, via legislation authored and passed by Congress’s popularly-elected members, via a constitutional commision convened on the authority of that same Congress of popular folk, or even by a referendum or plebiscite held amongst affected peoples (such as ones that, over years, crystallised Muslim “autonomy” in certain provinces).

It’s all about popularity and popularity is the only true absolute not just in a democracy but in any form of government. After all, even monarchs and dictators rule on the back of a popular consent to be ruled over or, more specifically, to live in fear of the consequences of dissent. In the case of the 1986 people power “revolution”, it was only when the idea of revolting gained popularity that said “revolution” succeeded. You need to be popular to get things done. And you need to make your ideas popular for these to be realised.

So, in this instance following the Marawi City crisis, “human rights” is trumped by popularity — indisputable proof that “human rights” is not an absolute of humanity. This is the reality today’s “activists” and Martial Law Crybabies need to deal with.


Post Author: benign0

benign0 is the Webmaster of

Leave a Reply

14 Comments on "Here is why ‘human rights’ is a weak argument against Martial Law…"

newest oldest most voted
Notify of

There was a protest conducted recently by Filipinos and Americans in New York City calling for the end of Martial Law in Mindanao. One of them held out a sign saying “No to Islamophobia”. Seriously? I wonder if all these yellowtards and butthurt liberal cunts even bothered to read the difference between conditions set for this Martial law and the one previously before crying their eyes out. There goes the argument that Liberals are smarter than the rest.


We now have this generation of pus*** when extremism and terrorism are all over the place. They have a way of making people go against each other while the real ememies attack. Who do you thinks controls the local opposition? It’s all an art of subjugation. Inform while you can. Don’t let the unnecessary distract you.

Declaration of Martial Law is basically pointless because it will not be used as part of a coherent plan to sort the place out. If the intention was actually to send the army in (which is what Martial Law means) to arrest all known troublemakers and create a large and effective police presence, it might achieve something. If Duterte had any intent to improve the economy, such that people could run businesses in peace without fear of depredation from either paramilitaries or the “authorities”, then Mindanao might stay clean after being cleaned up. Since law and order, planning, and efficiency… Read more »
I somewhat agree with the sentiment that we should strive to maintain “human rights”, but I argue that the terrorists have already committed acts of violence upon people. I’ll even admit that there might be abuses under martial law, but I won’t accept the terrorists’ act. The terrorists have already violated human rights, and yet, why do people even try to defend them? We must act now and stop the terrorists before more “human rights” are violated. You’d think these people would be internally consistent and consider “human rights” as a sacred cow against whom violations shouldn’t be permitted, and… Read more »
salagintong bukid

the Marawi siege might be the result of the BBL failure and now they want it to take by force. it is the dream of ninoy and rashid lucman to have a separate state. luisita is the roots of all this mess happening in the Philippines. their next move might be worse. it might start a civil war.

Human Rights, became the” tool of convenience of the Aquino Cojuangco political axis, and the drug dealer/nymphomaniac Leila de Lima …they used it, as a “cover”, for theirr crimes and evil deeds. It was also used as their “diversionary tactic”. Marcos Sr. Martial Law was used as a “bogeyman”, to frighten gullible Filipinos.. Human rights advocates, peddle themselves, as heroes and saints, who opposed Martial Law. There is war already in Mindanao, with ISIS, this fanatical radical branch of Islam, does not recognize human rights. I have yet to see some human rights advocates, go to Saudi Arabia, Iran, and… Read more »

The opinions that are held with passion are always those for which no good ground exists; indeed the passion is the measure of the holders lack of rational conviction. Opinions in politics and religion are almost always held passionately.

OK, SO Benigs likes living without ‘CIVIL RIGHTS’, THIS IS NOT ABUT HUMAN RIGHTS, it is about ‘CIVIL RIGHTS’ which Martial Law negates.The idiotic admin. of this web-site will only start getting with the anti-Martial Law position when ‘Freedom of Speech’ no longer exitsts and then it will be TOO LATE. Filipino’s were WARNED, RIGHT HERE, 14 months ago when ,RIGHT HERE, it was pointed out that Rodrigo Duterte would institute Martial Law….and HERE IT IS !!! Coming to the entire country soon. IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT IS HAPPENING, at the EXACT MOMENT THAT DUTERTE IS MEETING WITH PUTIN… Read more »

When this web-site is shut down or others that speak against the government are SHUT DOWN….then ,they will realize its too late.
Martial Law was predicted and Duterte thinks he will aling with Russia and get ride of the USA…NOPE, it aint gonna happen. Duterte’s days are numbered.YOU CAN NOT KILL 8,000 PEOPLE AND GET AWAY WITH IT !!!


The late Soviet Union dictator Joseph Stalin, killed more than 11 million Soviets …He got away with it… No people; no problem was his political tactic…