p Historical materialism studies the intellectual sphere in its entirety, and looks into all its functions. The concept of social consciousness encompasses all types of intellectual activity. Elements that make up the intellectual life of society pass through the social consciousness before they take shape. This serves as a criterion when attributing this or that social phenomenon to the sphere of intellectual life. It follows that all social phenomena derive from social being and are organically linked with the social consciousness.

p Social consciousness is a functioning system of intellectual life, 133 comprising the interplay of the social and the individual consciousness, the ideological struggle between social groups and classes, and the exchange of views, ideas, and theories, their origin, development, and influence on the masses.

p Lastly, the social consciousness functions jointly with the social institutions through which it takes the form of actual ideological relations.

p Social being determines the social consciousness; this, however, does not go to say that ideas derive directly from the development of the productive forces, from production.

p The development of the productive forces is expressed in the social consciousness through changes taking place in the basis, i. e., the economic structure of society. It is through the basis that production ultimately shapes the character and development of the social consciousness and ideology.

p Accordingly, the materialist philosophy of the 19th-century Russian revolutionary democrats reflected the material needs of the society of that time and the grave conflict between the peasant serfs and the serf-owning landed gentry; it was the theoretical groundwork for the idea of a peasant revolution. Consequently, the materialist philosophy in question was rooted in the sharpening of the class struggle between the peasants and the landlords, which, in turn, reflected the sharp contradiction between the new productive forces 134 associated with the development of capitalism and the old, feudal, relations of production that had begun to act as a brake on the progress of the new productive forces.

p The ideology of Russian materialists and revolutionary democrats drew its strength in the ties with the oppressed people and was itself an expression of the people’s interests and aspirations. That is why it was an advanced ideology.

p Thus, when examining the sources and character of this or that form of social consciousness it is relevant to base the conclusions not only on the given level of production, but also on the character of the basis, the material needs of society, and the entire course of the class struggle generated by the economic system of that society. The social consciousness may fall behind social being, or vice versa. And all this can be explained only if we recognise the relatively independent development of the forms of the social consciousness.

p As Engels stressed (in his letters on historical materialism of the 1890s), various elements of the superstructure enter into complex relationships with each other and with the basis. In this interaction, economic development is, in the final analysis, the driving force of development, but only in the final analysis. Engels therefore points to a certain relatively independent development of the forms of social consciousness.

p Where does this relative independence derive from? Primarily from the continuity in the development of each form of the social consciousness. The arts, science, and philosophy of each period of history repose on the material accumulated in the preceding period. If we overlook this continuity, we will not understand the development of ideology. It is hardly possible to study the culture of the Renaissance, of Italian humanitarianism, unless we take into account the heritage it received from antiquity.

p Nor is it possible to comprehend the Utopian socialism of Saint-Simon and Fourier without taking account of French materialism. In his AntiDiikring, Engels describes Utopian socialism as essentially reflecting the contradictions of capitalism while in form continuing and developing the positions of the 18th-century French Enlighteners. Engels wrote: "Like every new theory, modern socialism had, at first, to connect itself with the intellectual stock-in-trade ready to its hand, however deeply its roots lay in [material] economic facts.”   [135•1 

p As we have seen, there is a certain continuity in the development of the social consciousness, and while every ideology essentially reflects the socioeconomic contradictions and relations of the 136 given age, it is in form a continuation or a result of a critical analysis, or some other form of use, of the preceding ideological heritage.

p This continuity should not he conceived as a simple reproduction of past ideas. The ideological heritage can be made use of in different ways: it may be accepted or critically analysed or even rejected, or taken as a starting point. Whatever the case, there is never any gap in the development of ideology. No one can start from scratch. neither philosopher nor artist; in some way, he always leans on what was achieved by his predecessors. This is a relevant point, because there is no progress without such continuity.

p Insofar as there is continuity in ideological development, economics and economic relations influence the development of ideology through the material and the specific features of the given form of the social consciousness. As Engels pointed out in a letter written in the 1890s, in this realm the economy creates nothing anew, but it determines the way in which the thought material is altered and further developed. And as Engels added, even this occurs for the most part indirectly. Thus, Engels conceived the continuity of the forms of the social consciousness as a reason that explains the relative independence in which these forms develop.

p Another reason is the interaction of various forms of the social consciousness, of various ele- 137 ments of the superstructure occupying different positions in relation to the basis. The state and law are closer to the basis and therefore express the interests of the ruling class most fully. Other elements of the superstructure, such as philosophy and religion, arc farther from the basis, and, as Engels put it, tend to soar in the air. In the final analysis, they, too, reflect the economic system of society, although not directly, but through the state and politics. Thus, the elements of the superstructure interact among themselves through certain intermediate links. Every form of the social consciousness reflects social being differently-in the form of the political or the legal consciousness, etc. This is another reason behind the relative independence of the forms of social consciousness.

p Lastly, a relevant point is the social division of labour. In his letter to C. Schmidt, Engels pointed out that the emergence of different forms of the social consciousness may be better understood from the point of view of the social division of labour. Every ideological field is also a branch of the division of labour in intellectual production. The emergence of the state, for example, is accompanied by the appearance of professional politicians, jurists, etc.; with art becoming a form of the social consciousness there appear artists for whom creative work becomes a profession.

p Alongside the division of labour in material production, there is, as we have seen, division of 138 labour in intellectual production.

p The forms of the social consciousness being relatively independent, they react in their turn upon social being. Vulgar economic materialism reduces all forms of the social consciousness directly to economics and, consequently, does not recognise the role of ideas. By denying ideology its relative independence and looking upon all ideological phenomena as a direct result of economic development, the economic materialists playdown the role of ideology in social development. Considering the economy as the only active force in social development, they usually conceived the various forms of the social consciousness as passive offspring of the economy.

p Marxists-Leninists have always opposed this interpretation of the role of social ideas. Lenin combatted the Economists and Mensheviks who drifted to vulgar "economic materialism".

p Unlike vulgar materialism, historical materialism recognises the vital role of ideas and the reverse influence of ideas, theories, and political institutions upon the development of social being. This influence can be of different kinds insofar as ideas can be reactionary or progressive. Reactionary ideas slow down the development of societywhile progressive ideas accelerate it, helping resolve the successive problems of social development.

p For all that, Marxists-Leninists do not see ideas as the prime mover of social upheavals. The reason for revolutionary overturns is rooted in the material conditions of society. When people come to realise the conflicts and contradictions in the economic development of society and to recognise the new requirements posed by this development, they obtain the intellectual weapon for resolving these conflicts in new social ideas.

p Marxism-Leninism, as we know, looks upon ideas as a great force of social development. Marx wrote that under certain conditions ideas turn into a material force-when they take possession of the minds of the masses.  [139•1  Advanced ideas are not enough to sweep away obsolete social institutions. Ideas as such cannot alter the life of society; they become a great and vital force only when they seize upon the minds of the masses, when they win over classes. Only then can they be translated into practice.

p The Marxist-Leninist conception of the role of ideas in social development is of special significance in comprehending the development of socialist society. Here the role of advanced ideas vastly increases, for they accelerate the develop- 140 ment of society and its progress towards communism.

p The extent to which ideas influence the development of society hinges chiefly on the following:

p (1) the character of the given social system and the objective laws of its development;

p (2) the character of the ideas, and the extent to which they reflect the material requirements of this society;

p (3) the extent of the assimilation of these ideas by the masses.

p On these three conditions depends the growth of the role of ideas in a socialist environment.

p As to the last condition, there is a cardinal difference between Marxist ideas and the preceding philosophical ideas. By their very nature, Marxist-Leninist ideas can win over the masses, for they express their vital interests. Consequently, they spread so widely as no other advanced ideas did in the past.

p The ideas of Marxism-Leninism are cardinally different from all preceding ideas in character and because they precisely reflect the material requirements of society. And the more accurately ideas reflect the urgent requirements of society, the bigger their role in society. From this point of view, the ideas of Marxism-Leninism play a bigger role in social development than any preceding progressive ideas ever have played.

p Lastly, the increasing role of ideas in socialist 141 society is explained by the character of the social system and the objective laws of its development.

p The socialist economy does not develop spontaneously. Its economic laws are consciously applied by society. Socialism by its very nature cannot be spontaneous, for its development depends on the conscious activities of the millions upon millions of workers. Socialism is truly built by the workers led by the Communist Party and the socialist state, which take account of the operation of the economic laws. This factor accounts for the enormously increased role of the advanced outlook and the conscious activity of the masses in the socialist environment.

In socialist society, too, social being is the determining factor, while the social consciousness is a reflection of social being. But the role of social ideas increases within the framework of this general dependence of the social consciousness on social being. It is very important to take this into account when building socialism and communism.