Ya if u take it out of all of its context. Within the paragraph, the post, and the book, the meaning seems evident.

I mean thats the “crack a few eggs to make an omelette” type of situation, right? Fundamentally speaking, a-lot more people will suffer and die in a world without such technological advancements and scientific control. So perhaps, although not perfect, it is still a better alternative.

I dont fully understand your last point

I think your argument is that, for the social stability and the Utopia to be maintained, the social norms would have to become extremely tyrannical. But are the norms truly tyrannical or are they merely practical. There will be norms in any human society, and not all behaviour would be socially acceptable. Thus if those norms work to create a utopia where everyone is happy and satisfied, perhaps they are fine. Though, i would say that the scene which you speak of does a good job describing the fragility of a utopia built on such norms, in observation of most people in the society who have not interacted with this person from the outside world (which is, in fact, an anomaly), they seem to be “all good”.