Ooh, a potential philosophical debate!
I don't think it's feasible for a functioning society to be completely emotionless. Perhaps it's possible to tinker with an individual's brain so that they lack emotions, but I don't know... usually, the closest you get to that is "lack of empathy," "lack of shame," or just emotions that crop up at times that a "normal" person would be feeling something else.
Your dream told you humanity must be more like ants. But consider this: while ants may be a dime a million, drones created to do their part, what makes them actually do their part in their colony? It's the desire to keep their colony alive. It's why they will work themselves nearly to death and why they will die defending the colony.
Now, for humans, if you want to make a group of people selfless, loyal, and dedicated to upholding society, think about what you need. You need emotion to produce that amount of drive in a human. It's unlikely that you will be able to remove emotions from the equation and expect humanity to just complacently do their jobs, because that's not how ants even work.
Also, consider where emotions come from. They are not a human creation; they manifest themselves (albeit a bit more simply) in other animals, and they're to respond to the environment around you. It's meant to aid your survival. That fear is to keep you from getting eaten. The anger is to give you an edge in a direct confrontation. Happiness points out what's good for you and your survival. And without emotion, can a person really tell for themselves- without society giving them the answer- what is the difference between right and wrong? They'll just accept whatever's told to them because there's no "gut feeling" to tell them otherwise. Enter an easily implemented dystopian system that makes human life suck.
Get rid of emotions, and you get rid of people's capacity to care. Do you really want a society made up of people with the same emotional state as a lobotomy patient?