With that in mind, a "gossip" might be someone who speaks an unflattering truth about an upper class person. A "narcissist" might be someone who presumes to affect some symbol of an upper class, or otherwise disrespects an upper class person.
How times have changed, or rather should that be definitions?
Now where does royalty and politicians fit into all of this?
That's simple - the admiration that royalty gets is appropriate admiration for their status; but when someone who isn't royalty wants the same level of admiration, that's a need for excessive admiration.
This isnt a Rorschach test.
>Life is way more fun if i get along with others
Not in my experience it hasnt, but maybe thats the people I attract and forced to work with.
Is it because the peasants had internalized oppression? Or could it alternatively be because working together as a community was important to their very survival then, and so punishing subversive members creating discord was a matter of community survival? Which seems more reasonable: that the peasants had so much time and mindspace to focus on trivialities like making sure poor people didn't dress like rich people, or that they dedicated time to it because a raging narcissist actually posed a real threat?
I guess I'm trying to say: maybe the people of the past weren't just all assholes preoccupied with making sure poor people knew their place and were instead much like us in that they focused on getting through the day (and their intentions aligned with that). That they spent inordinate amounts of time making fancy garbs just to humiliate random people in their village because "they're too poor to dress that way" just sounds like a fantasy we place on them because to take them seriously would run against a lot of cultural vogues (like that shame could have any possible value in society).