Rights without principles

Regarding Sarah Benton's March 6 article, "Trashing liberties we die for": I'm left with the perception that voters and politicians care little about principles. Politicians care little for principles because voters don't. Concepts such as "rights" or justice raise a yawn in voters that idealize democracy (numbers) as a standard of truth rather than a method of peace. This article attempts to collectivize all liberals from different camps as contradictory, when they merely have different views.
However, in Ted Rall's article on the same day, "Property rights to the biggest taxpayer," it's a sad irony that the so-called defenders of capitalism -- big business -- are such poor advocates of it, some because of their anti-intellectual pragmatism and others because of their dogmatic idealism divorced from context. In the case presented, a homeowner in an inner city ghetto is fighting to avoid eviction by local government and big business under the "eminent domain" provisions for property redevelopment. Big business is holding the collectivist "good of society" ticket while libertarians are fighting for rights at any price.
Wilhelmina Dery is an unlikely libertarian campaigner. I suggest that, after living in the same house for 86 years, the principle she is fighting is fear of change rather than property rights. Of course she should have a voice, but without a rational argument for opposing the generous compensation, she should be evicted. I would suggest that if business executives used a bit of empathy, she might have gone willingly. I think all the highlights of my life resulted from change -- it's about time Dery experienced one.
Source: http://www.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/getarticle.pl5?rc20050320a5.htm
ANDREW SHELDON CROOKSSaitama