>
> A lynch mob chases an innocent man, eager to beat and possibly kill him
> not because of anything he has done but because of the color of his
> skin. One can say that one understands the sources of their fear and
> rage. One can regret the upbringing that has given them such
> a--racist--way of responding to the world. No matter how much literary
> and sociological imagination one has, only a murderous racist can say
> that in their place one would join the lynch mob.
>
how about the point raised by one of your other respondents? its not upbringing that leads to their rage but the frustration and abuse that they went through. technically i cannot think of a valid way to challenge you. however on a less technical but more [i claim] meaningful view that includes context, the acts of a white lynch mob going after a black man in the deep south is significantly different from an opressed afghani mob going after an innocent white man. it is possible [even for the victim of their attack] to sympathize with their state and not blame them excessively for their misplaced anger (which of course does not equate to condoning it).
put another way, the illogical outburst of an oppressed group is more understandable and forgivable in the context of a humanitarian viewpoint, over the acts of persecution (sometimes logically thought out) of a powerful group. that this is somehow obvious i take for granted (thus to some extent, begging the question). if it isn't, i can try to make the case in a pseudo-technical sense.
--ravi