Its like the integrity of reality is compromised, and if it breaks, you are alone, inert, decaying. That D&G bit about carrying around a piece of ground, forget who mentioned it and where.
Living according to a set of doctrines/theses/positions means that the weak spots need to be treated gingerly, and any traffic in such spots need to be forbidden, taboos established, practices that threaten to jeopardize the integrity of reality. But you said yourself: breaking taboos unleashes energy.
So there will perpetually be components of the system that actively work to destabilize the system's predominant regime, a sort of metastability function. Where must the system be aiming, if it can afford to establish a popular direction and also a variety of dissident directions. Do the latter temper the former? Or is the popular not the expression of this sort of progress?
But will there always be a next value structure that demarcates its own territory, establishes its own taboos? Being convinced that all convictions are non-starters is, itself, a conviction. A sort of nihilism, which is perhaps the primary attractor/vortex at play within postmodernism.