A society where 1% live in hell and commit suicide and 99% are perfectly content, is more happy than one where 100% are just happy enough to not off themselves and no more.

This reminds me of the short story by Ursula K. LeGuin, "The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas", wherein Omelas, an ecstatically happy utopia, depends for its existence on the torment of one single child, kept in a basement dungeon. Citizens can view the child any time they please. Some never do, some only once, some quite often. Some, very few, after viewing the child, leave the city forever.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ones_Who_Walk_Away_from_Om...

That logic justifies slavery.

Your words not mine.

From this I conclude you believe some things never found in "that logic":

a) Slavery improves societal happiness

b) Maximizing happiness justifies coercion

Thankfully most people don't share your values.

> That logic justifies slavery.

That to me looks only like an observation, not an argument in favor of anything in particular.

Personally speaking, I would not be happy if 1% of my fellow citizens were tormented so that I along with my 99% cohort could be happy, paradoxical as that is.

Let's use the observation to understand what's happening in our respective societies and make things better for everyone.