> They follow some logic and can be deduced from first principles

Well. Some of these follow when you accept certain axioms and work from there. Not everyone accepts those axioms (at at least the same ones), if the vast variance in "human rights" across the globe is any indication.

Now of course it can be argued that only a few countries in the "civilized western world" understand logic and can come up with the proper first principles. (People have told me that)

It's logically fine to reject axioms. You could argue, for example, that torture is morally good because you disagree with the axiom that suffering is bad. That's logically consistent, and logic alone is built on axioms and therefore cannot discern which axioms are "better."

The solution for that is to reverse positions and have the consequences of your logic performed on you.

In a good system you don't care on which side of the ledger you're on, which is something that that same logic would allow you to deduce.