I share your anger but not your argument. Your analysis is based on the distinction between the victims. The distinction is real but not relavent.I think the real cause of the contrast in the scale of response was the difference between the perpetrators. Attackers in Chandramohan’s case are enemies of everybody. Unfortunately, the persecutors of Badal are only enemies of Dalits. From an activist point of view, your piece will play a very necessary role of sensitizing the liberal, secular intelligentia to the oppression of Dalits. But from an analytical point of view, it has the danger of legitimizing the misconceived equation of two qualitatively different kinds of evils. I am really very unhappy to write these lines because it may spoil the appeal your well-meant attempt – to shame the upper caste liberals by means of showing the contrast- may have. I would not have objected to it if I don’t fear that it would persuade some of the Dalits to equate caste oppression with Hindutva. Hindutva is a much bigger danger and requires much immediate response. You rightly showed the poverty of our secularism which opposes only the spurious claims to religion but neglects the caste oppression which is really sanctioned by religion. But, this very necessary expansion of secular is better achieved by complementing and not by contrasting, caste and religion.