Your mind was blown from the idea that a government does not necessarily exist to serve the interest of its people, or the little historical blurb?
In any case, the heavily ingrained belief of government benevolence in contemporary Western societies, is horrific. But not surprising, with minds like Edward L. Bernays at work (his 1928 book Propaganda should be mandatory reading for everyone).
I don't mean to speak for the person you're addressing, but I suspect this was the part that was surprising: "some form of safety valve that allowed class conflict to be mediated and ameliorated was better than the alternatives as far as the interests of the upper classes".
That's not an obvious truth, and doesn't deserve self-important snark.
I've also read 'Propaganda', and would also recommend it despite its age.
It's been obvious since before Bismarck introduced the welfare state in the 1840's onwards.
His opposition tried to tarnish his image by claiming he was introducing "state socialism", after which he himself started using the same term about his welfare programs, and explicitly made the point that it was intended to counter the influence of the socialists and calm the masses.
Bismarck, which was an ultra-conservative monarchist, actually went further than the majority of the socialist opposition at the time in anticipation of further demands, in order to quell their support.
In any case, the heavily ingrained belief of government benevolence in contemporary Western societies, is horrific. But not surprising, with minds like Edward L. Bernays at work (his 1928 book Propaganda should be mandatory reading for everyone).