p The development of the productive forces inevitably leads to a change in the old production relations, the formation of new ones and to a change in society’s economic system. “The changes in the economic foundation lead sooner or later to the transformation of the whole immense superstructure.”  [353•1 

p A change in the superstructure does not, however, immediately follow a change in the basis, in the society’s economy. Changes take place in the basis prior to changes in the superstructure. The new mode of production that represents an antagonistic system of a higher order takes shape within the old basis. Once it has emerged, it is compelled to exist for some time under the domination of the old superstructure with which it conflicts. The aggravation of this contradiction usually gives rise to a clash between the classes that defend the old superstructure and those that represent the new basis, i.e. to a revolution, in the course of which the old superstructure is destroyed and a new one, corresponding to the new socio-economic system, is established.

p Thus, for example, the new, capitalist mode of production began to take shape spontaneously at some point within feudal society and then spread to one economic sphere after another. The development of capitalist production was soon opposed by the old feudal superstructure, which came into conflct with the new basis that was taking shape. As the bourgeoisie gradually acquired a dominant position in the economy, it naturally sought to gain a corresponding status in politics, to take control of the organs of power and use them to clear the way for their economic activities. New political, juridical, moral, philosophical and other theories emerged which criticised the morals and institutions of feudal society. The bourgeois ideologists put forward the principles of national sovereignty, equality of all before the law, the 355 abolition of privileges for the nobility, and so forth. Eventually the old, feudal superstructure was demolished and the new, bourgeois superstructure established as a result of a bourgeois revolution.

p Not all the component elements of a superstructure and not all its aspects undergo changes in the reconstruction of the old superstructure. Much of what was formerly the content of the ld^ superstructure rpmainc anH fWplpps further within the new superstructure. This is due, above all, to the fact that, in its development, the superstructure is subject not only to the requirements ot the basis, but to its intrinsic laws. The basis determines the direction of changes in the superstructure. Though developing under the persistent influence of the basis, the superstructure uses the available material, which ensures continuity in this field.

p Any thinker has at his disposal the material “which has formed itself independently out of the thought of previous generations and has gone through its own independent course of development in the brains of these successive generations".  [355•1 

Continuity in the development of the superstructure may also be traced to the continuity in the development of the successive bases. For example, continuity of private property and the ensuing exploitation of the working people may 356 be traced in the development of the antagonistic production relations. Both these factors remain when the transition is made from one antagonistic basis to another. Only the form changes. This inevitably ensures continuity in the political, juridical and other institutions and in the ideology. So, when it takes power, each new exploiting class improves and adapts the state apparatus to its needs, rather than destroy it. Religion, as a rule, is not discarded, since in all exploiters’ societies it serves the ruling class and helps it keep the oppressed classes under control.