Which is better?

A number of examples have been discussed on the topic of utopias. They support my view that a utopian society cannot be created because of human nature. People are unique and different ideas of what a perfect society would be like. The conflict between these views makes it impossible for a society to keep everyone happy at once.

Communist societies were displayed as an example of changes to government and social class intended to make everyone happy. They were based on the concept of complete economic equality, but this took away the incentive for people to be good members of society. In the Milagro Bean Field War, the small rural town was not very prosperous and had some economic difficulties, but the residents still liked their home and didn't want to leave it.

In Brave New World, science reached a certain level, and was then repressed in order to keep people from thinking too much. Ignorance was meant to keep them happy. Those who became disenchanted with the society were sent into isolated communities with people like them, where they to would be happy. This made it seem like utopia on the surface. On a little deeper level, some unrest could still be observed. One of the people in a position of power, Mustapha Mond, was a "world controller." He was enlightened to the workings of the society and thought that it was good in the sense that people were happy. Deep down though, he was restless and longed for deeper meaning in life.

In all of these examples, as well as the others that were previously explored, some societies seemed on the verge of perfection. None of them were utopias though. A utopia would have to be 100% perfect with no flaws whatsoever, because perfect means to be entirely devoid of flaws. Even one small hole in the fabric of a society can, and will, be exploited and will lead to dissent or the downfall of that society.