More on Structure (its problems)

Is it really possible to have structure without order? I think so. The ideal social structure should be something like everyone having a place, sitting on a circle: all the places are equal distance from the center.

But let's read this analogy carefully:
1. What center? - what central doctrine(s) is one going to set up a structure with? And why that one?
2. What place? - why an essential (in the sense of essence) category? Haven't we done away with Being?
3. Why sitting? - do we really need conform to one certain social ideal?
4. Why static? - what about social fluidity?

These four questions are certainly valid, critical questions. There are generally two kinds of reactions to these questions:
i) one feels that the structure is ruined, and now one must look for a new one that would be able to suppress those questions.
ii) one feels annoyed and would like to re-enforce this structure no matter what; in other words, throw in the "so-what" question.

Both of these options are not healthy. I think there is a third option: one should engage these questions and try to come up with a justification for the structure which can withstand academic scrutiny. I am really beginning to think it is ultimately useless to deconstruct one idea after another without any ground. The first response throws away the rock ground in search of a diamond one; the second response insists on building on sand. One must offer a positive model, and then use our deconstructive tools to see if the model works for us. All buildings have foundation, but it must be a solid foundation. We have done enough deconstructionl; now we ought to construct.