No, it was not a whim. The reason was lofty. All human beings were in the dire spiritual need of a model human life and the ‘most perfect human being’ would serve as the example of human excellence to everyone who wanted to live the life of a human being and serve life instead of death, ever-ravenous animals and phantoms. No, it was not the first attempt of its kind in the strict sense of the word, for, at the close of the millennium, various attempts had been made on national levels to select the heroes of the second millennium of the lord, and Churchill, Hitler, Mussolini, Roosevelt, Stalin, etc., had been ceremoniously crowned for their great success of purging the world of 60 million lives in the Second Idiotic War.

There also had been various other attempts by various groups; the results of which had naturally been that scoundrels adored the worst scoundrel, thieves the biggest thief, criminals the greatest criminal, jackals the towering jackal, rats the wonderful of rats, mosquitoes the quickest mosquito, dogs the long-tailed dog, cats the most successful cat, slaves selected their master, imbeciles the cunning-most one...

The land of the birth of socialist ideas portrayed their international hero of artists, intellectuals and writers through whom they had earned all honor for all the perverts and profligates: Marquis de Sade. A large section of the intelligentsia stained every nerve to invent uncountable ways to place this hero of theirs at the top of humanity.

But that was more than a decade earlier. Within a decade, the world made such gigantic strides in everything that the earlier heroes became but a heap of garbage.

We return back to 2012 AD.

‘How to select the most perfect man?’ was the fundamental question.

After much deliberation it was expressed as follows:

‘Religious-people will select one man from amongst all the religions; Scientists will present one candidate from the stream of science; Philosophers, similarly, will offer the candidature of one Philosopher; and Politicians have it obligatory to decide upon one politician as their choice. Amongst these four candidates the final selection shall be made by the appropriate means.’

It was not specified what those ‘appropriate’ means would be, and who would employ them, and how.

‘It is the responsibility of these four broad categories of people themselves to conduct researches and debates and thus reasonably arrive at the consensus regarding the best human being in their field.’ said the announcement.

It might be said in passing that in the year 1999, an author had striven hard to publish his work in which, contrary to all expectations, dispositions and emotions, he had explained: ‘Dishonesty, depravity, perversion, treachery, baseness, and all such verbs can never benefit anybody in truth.’ But innumerable people, due to their very ‘beneficial’ standings in life (or death), found no choice but to treat and worship these verbs as sacrosanct, and honorable, and to their benefit—and all such learned people in unison declared: ‘There has never been any revolution in the world, and there will never be any in future. Revolution is a mere fantasy.’ All such ladies and gentlemen were all hostile to revolution or any talk about the revolution, but history and humanity didn’t listen to, or obey, those people. They held the firm faith not in God or laws of nature and society but in the immortality of Omniscient, Omnipotent and Omnipresent capitalism. But opposite to their unshakeable faith, the said author had claimed:

‘You are a living being with blood, tissues, bones and brain... Yet I can tell you with certainty that you will die one day; and so will I.

‘And far more surer than your and my death is the death of capitalism. Hence, if the president, prime minister, other ministers, senators, parliamentarians, intellectuals, bureaucrats, etc., are the pathetic slaves of capitalism, they can do no good to themselves or humanity. They simply waste and disgrace both their own lives as well as humanity...

‘It is your sheer idiocy if you consider yourself immortal, and it is your stupendous idiocy if you consider capitalism immortal.’

Furthermore the author had clarified, ‘Living beings have a defense-mechanism that cures their ailments and diseases; they have a sensory-mechanism by which they can feel their discomforts, ailments, pains...yet the living beings die ultimately. On the other hand, capitalism is blessed with neither the defense-mechanism nor the sensory-mechanism; its diseases are incurable...

‘If you want a better life for yourself as well as your kith and kin, progeny and the whole humanity; if you want a world free of hunger, exploitation, houselessness,  illiteracy, unemployment, terrorism, frustrations... If you want to contribute your bit towards the making of the new humanity, let us join hands to end the sway and era of capitalism!...’

....

Philosophers have the reputation, deeper than the Marina-trench, that their quarrels form the Himalayas and their disagreements the Siberian steppes. It was hoped that through the shrubs, rocks, thorns, thistles, burs, and vast, frozen, coniferous forests, brambles and briers, the Philosophers would never be able to find their way out, and, consequently, they could never manage to be able to walk even an inch towards the conclusion on such an important issue—but everyone was proved wrong. Plato’s Allegory of the Cave and the fact that he had done a gigantic amount of pioneering work saw very little disagreement amongst the Philosophers. Many contenders, very strong contenders—the chief amongst whom was none other than Plato’s own disciple, Aristotle—were presented, but, ultimately, Plato carried the day.