Toynbee's Utopian Society

I find realism more compelling than idealism because of the following reasons;

1. Idealism is the foundation for a utopian society.

2. In a utopian society, there is no me or I. There is only we. This leaves no room for personal growth, ingenuity, or personal faith.

3. Although a utopian society allegedly guarantees the peaceful coexistence among all people within that society, the reality will always be that there will be someone who disagrees with those who rule. In essence, nobody likes to be a Stepford Wife or robotic husband.
As individuals, we cannot co-exist in a utopian society. Therefore, idealism is more or less, a pie-in-the-sky dream of children, not adults who must face the common realities of life. According to Luca Castellin in his survey: Quest for a New World Order, by

His tireless research in the realms of philosophy and religion, along with the strong influence of thinkers….the role of traditional religions was replaced by a more or less explicit form of gnosis. As various critics have pointed out, it appears that Toynbee’s utopian solution to the instability of the world order was not only an interpretation of Whig history on a global scale, but also, as Morgenthau suggested, a personal failure.”

If we follow the 2016 Presidential Election’s closely, we can see that there are candidates who propose a “utopian society”. Hillary Clinton proposes this by offering big government. Donald Trump proposes this by offering limited government. So who is right? Will we ever truly reach a point when a utopian society is possible? Those who practice extreme Islam propose that this is the case. Their proposal is to kill everyone who doesn’t follow Islam. This includes homosexuals, prostitutes, Christians, Jews, Americans, and everyone else who gets in the way of their utopian