Marx & Engels The Ruling Class and Ruling Ideas
Society is ruled by the class which owns the means of material production in society. The class that has the means of material production also controls the means of mental production so it is also society's main intellectual force. Consequently the ruling ideals are the ideal expression of the dominant material relations. In other words the predominant ideas in a society reflect those of the ruling classes and it's interests. These interests are presented as the common and universal interests of all members of society in order to legitimize the hegemony of the ruling class.
This is done by giving these ideas an "independent existence" from the ruling class in the form of (canonical) history. This is done in three ways. First by separating the governing ideas from the material conditions they where produced in. Second by proving a mystical connection among the successive ideas and regarding them as "self-determined". Third by then removing the mystical connection and personifying the ideas in a series of persons, the thinkers and philosophers.
Gramsci on Hegemony
Gramsci expands Marx & Engels argument by positing that making histories is also a privilege of the ruling class.
The history of the ruling classes according to Gramsci is realized in the state and so the history of the ruling classes is the history of the state. Because the subaltern classes are not unified in a state they lack their own history, consequently their history is intertwined with the history of the ruling classes. That means that ideas of the ruling class are embedded within the ideas of the subaltern. Gramsci posits the subaltern takes ideas from ruling class in the form of common sense, which is heavily influenced by dominant ideology. This creates a 'false consciousness', the believe that the values of the 'common sense' are universal and function to support or justify the status-quo.
So the ruling class manifests itself both through domination (by force) of antagonistic groups but more importantly through showing 'intellectual and moral leadership'. The ruling class governs by making alliances and compromises to stay in power for it can not using only dominance.
Cultural hegemony in this sense is a 'soft power' used by the ruling classes.
In this sense we can also look at the values of web2.0 companies like Facebook and Google and question whether the values they propagate are universally beneficial or are more beneficial to them. Does the requirement and promotion of "Real Names" on the internet really benefit us all by making the web more accountable or does it rather generate more reliable marketing data whilst hindering our free speech?
Are deregulation and a free market really beneficial for private individuals or only for large cooperations and banks?