The Impossible Balancing Act

There is a common theme in utopian-turned-dystopian societies in science fiction novels of people losing their individuality to create communities of perfect order. People in our modern society have not yet lost their individuality (ok I guess there's an argument for that, but this is not the place to have that discussion). Thus, we all have our own beliefs and views and political stances and thoughts. And as much strife as that causes, it's arguably a crucial part of our society. But part of that strife is that there is disagreement over what is "too much" or "too little" order and "too much" or "too little" freedom. Look at the Supreme Court cases in American history and see the documented proof of the struggle over the issue.

We can never have a balance of freedom and order in society. For it to be possible, everyone would have to agree that there is a balance, because if we evolve into a society in which I feel there is a balance between the two, there will be a group somewhere who is already halfway down the path of changing it for their idea of the true balance. If everyone agreed on such a vague, complex, and delicate issue, we would lose our individuality. To agree on the balance would mean compromising a vast expanse of moral and political personal ideals. 

While there is an argument that I should have written this as is there a balance of freedom and order in society in terms of my personal ideals, I don't see the balance that way. There can never be a balance because there are always tensions concerning the balance and I can't see a balance when there are violent clashes among opposing views on the balance.