Base and Superstructure

Conceptual Overview and Discussion

The origins of the idea were partly philosophical and partly political. Philosophically, Marx was hostile to idealism and he affirmed materialism. Politically, Marx dismissed rival forms of socialist thought on the grounds that the road to communism required not a moral conversion in the mind (the ideological superstructure); nor would political change suffice (the political superstructure); instead a socioeconomic revolution in the material conditions of life and in class relations (the base) was needed.

Marx used the term itself when summarizing the materialist conception of history in his “Preface to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy in 1859. He describes the mode of production as the real foundation upon which arises a legal and political superstructure as well as forms of social consciousness. Social, political, and intellectual life are conditioned by the mode of production.

The metaphor contains three main ideas. First, there is the assumption that society is like a building. Part of the assumption is that society is built or constructed, as opposed to having evolved or grown. Part also is that, like a building, a society is composed of levels such as a basement and upper stories. Yet the likening of societies to buildings did not go unquestioned by critics. Critics charged that societies are not akin to buildings; they are not constructed out of raw materials but instead are composed of specifically human activities; they are far more complex than buildings; they cannot easily be torn down and rebuilt to new plans.

Second, there is the implication that what happens in the economic realm is hidden or taken for granted as is a building's underground substructure. The base–superstructure image is in this way similar to the image of a passenger ship in which the privileged in the upper salons are insulated from the harsh conditions of the stokers in the engine rooms.

Third, there is the thesis that the economic forces and relations of production are more important, influential, and fundamental than any other aspect of life because they are the bases or preconditions of every other social activity. Marxism split into two tendencies on this point. One tendency, sometimes referred to as “vulgar” or “determinist” Marxism, [Page 48]held that the forces of production and class relations directly control the rest of society. All else is an epiphenomenon. The other tendency, associated primarily with Antonio Gramsci, granted relative autonomy to politics and culture while endorsing economic determination in the final instance.

...