In recent years, the Left has appropriated the term “human rights” in its discourse and by dominating various institutions. And at the heart of this vague concept, which they have expanded and expanded until it has lost all meaning, lies a breeding ground for the ideological advancement of some of the worst ideas we have seen in the West in recent decades, such as the mutilation of minors in the name of gender ideology.

The blatant, unilateral manipulation of the concept of human rights has even permeated areas such as health, as denounced by organizations that monitor abuses within multilateral mechanisms like the United Nations.

“On paper, the right to health is unquestionable. We all want robust health care systems, access to medicines, and dignified medical care,” emphasized researcher Neydy Casillas in a statement at the end of February. “But in recent years, international organizations have been using this right to introduce an agenda that goes far beyond basic health care.”

Casillas, vice president for International Affairs at the Global Center for Human Rights (GCHR), lamented the distinctly radical leftist slant adopted in recent reports to the United Nations Human Rights Council and the United Nations General Assembly.

Currently, the Special Rapporteur on the right to health, Tlaleng Mofokeng, is using language in these documents that is antithetical to the principles of health care and closer to a kind of “wokism” mentality.

For example, she has argued that access to abortion is an integral part of the right to health and that restricting it causes “psychological harm”; that comprehensive sexuality education should be implemented as a health prevention strategy; and that so-called “gender affirmation,” including interventions with minors, is an obligation derived from the right to mental health.

For Casillas, with such precepts, the right to health ceases to be a basic guarantee and instead “becomes a vehicle for controversial policies that many countries and millions of families have not democratically approved.”

She believes that Mofokeng’s statements do not represent a universal consensus. “We are witnessing a progressive reinterpretation of human rights by international offices that are not accountable to citizens,” the researcher stated.

“We believe that the right to health should protect life, strengthen the family, and respect the sovereignty of states — it should not be used to impose an ideological agenda,” Casillas said on behalf of the GCHR, which advocates for national laws on life, family, and religious freedom.

Her warning about the dangers of globalism and its institutions reminds us how, although weakened by the Trump administration, these supranational structures persist in pursuing ideological agendas that are harmful to people and contrary to the sovereignty of nations.

It is no surprise that globalist representatives have a résumé like Mofokeng’s, clearly demonstrating their vision of humanity and how society should be.

In July 2020, she was appointed Special Rapporteur on health. But before that, as a physician specializing in promoting universal access to health, HIV care, youth-oriented services, and family planning, she was a member of South Africa’s Gender Equality Commission. She served on the boards of the Safe Abortion Action Fund and the Global Advisory Council on Sexual Health and Wellbeing.

Interestingly, the Left has fundamentally rejected the concept of human rights. In “On the Jewish Question,” Karl Marx argues that these are merely rights of bourgeois society, selfish rights of man as an isolated individual, an invention of capitalism to grant individual freedom to the bourgeoisie so they can engage in commerce.

Now that, since the second half of the 20th century, they have found a way to advance their revolutionary political aims through this term, they praise the concept of “human rights” while simultaneously distorting it to resemble their worst ideas.