SevenBillionth

The depth of humanity of Sir Bobby Robson astounds me. His legacy still dominates the world's biggest sport today, through the likes of Pep Guardiola & Jose Mourinho. Sir Alex Ferguson credited Sir Bobby for helping him getting started in management. The two most talented players of their generation: Ronaldo & Paul Gascoigne said they owe him everything. The best goalscorers of their era: Alan Shearer and Gary Lineker likewise.

The World Cup Italia '90 scenes and the recent interviews with Gascoigne about his relationship with Sir Bobby were the most poignant. It's as if Sir Bobby saw himself in Gazza: both born entertainers, loved people, incredibly talented in their own ways. I think Sir Bobby knew after retiring, Gazza would not be able to cope without the game, just as he couldn't. Most people who are into football already knew most of the stories in this film, but not this one. I defy you to not to be moved.

He had an encyclopaedic knowledge of football and was sharp as a button, yet treated all those around him with respect and compassion. Such a rare combination of qualities make him inspirational.

Mourinho: "A person does not die until the last person who loves him dies".

A fascinating insight into the underlying causes of many of the world's problems. The solution Z proposes is flawed, although a sound basis for further thought.

The most powerful flaw with this new society is how people are motivated to strive and improve. If everyone gets their fair share, what is the motivation to toil in difficult jobs that will never be made redundant such as the sciences, computing, or robotics? An individual's life can never be better than his neighbour's. So is societal gain from your endevours enough of an incentive to spend your life toiling in a science lab rather than do less challenging work? Given the choice, most people would choose an easy life.

Secondly, the natural conclusion of this new society is Gattaca. The first half hour of Z explains that criminals, addicts, etc are more a product of their environment than genetically predisposed. By removing the bad environment so the argument goes - poverty, poor education, healthcare, inequality, etc, the conditions that create problematic people are removed. Sounds plausible. However would such a society not then place far more emphasis on the quality of your genes? Environment and cause & effect would no longer be factors, everyone would receive good upbringings. The distinguishing factor would be genetic. And that essentially is the dystopia depicted in Gattaca (an excellent film btw).

To those who say this solution is communist, which has been tried and failed - this solution is not communist. It is post-communist. With the power of modern computers, the efficient resource-allocation system could be operated on a decent-spec home computer. The reason communism kept failing is that it inevitably led to a corrupt elite who were rightfully deposed by popular uprising. If everyone can duplicate the system on which resources are allocated themselves on their own computers, there can be no accusation of corruption. There would be healthy debate and democratic decision making as to the rules and inputs to the system, but there would be no elitist subversion of the planned economy that people hated so much about communism (nor capitalism's elite 1% owning 40%).

So in summary, not the definitive blueprint it wants to be, but food for thought nevertheless.