I wonder why many people were willing to accept the sad and harsh context of their lives.  This is highlighted for me when considering history of what we often classify as first world countries.

Many of these nations (e.g., England, France, Japan) had basically only two classes (upper and lower classes).  This meant a few (the upper class) were able to leverage the efforts of the majority (the lower class) to live in comfort and luxury.

Peasant class

Recently watching some British historical dramas (via streaming of course) got me wondering why for example poor servants, farmers and manual workers accepted their lower social status.

I wonder if the “it could be worse” mentality had much to do with it.  Perhaps those nobles and members of the royal classes provided basic subsistence to the working classes so they would not rebel.

Coupled with this were situations where the the very unfortunate could be used as examples of how a person could suffer if they did not accept their position in life and carry on.  That is help them realize things could be worse.

Rise of the middle class

As North America became colonized the native inhabitants were often placed in the lower class roles while the immigrants (many arriving with lower class backgrounds) took the opportunity to overcome the “could be worse stigma” and created a middle class.

That is they freed themselves in the new world from the masters that wanted them to stay in their places.

At this time the creation of the middle class became a relatively world wide phenomena as the Americas became more populated by immigrants the lower classes in the “old” countries began also to break out the the prison’s created for them by the upper classes.

Ultimately today the class structures still exist but for many middle and upper middle classes provide opportunities to think more in terms of the possible than be constrained by the “good enough”.