Skip to content

Ted Grant Stalin Versus Marx

Marxist Theory · 2026-05-13

Core Argument

The central thesis is that the Soviet bureaucracy, through its official spokesman Aleksandrov, had by 1946 openly abandoned the Marxist theory of the state. Where Marx, Engels, and Lenin held that the state is an instrument of class rule that will wither away under socialism, the Stalinist bureaucracy now claimed that the state must be strengthened and preserved even after the abolition of classes. Grant argues this is not a theoretical refinement but a conscious ideological justification for the bureaucracy's own continued rule. The claim is that the bureaucracy, having consolidated itself as a privileged social layer, requires a powerful state to defend its position against the working class — and therefore must revise Marxism to present that state as permanent.

Theoretical Grounding

The analysis is rooted in the classical Marxist theory of the state as developed by Marx in The Civil War in France, Engels in Anti-Dühring and The Origin of the Family, and Lenin in The State and Revolution. Grant draws on the fundamental proposition that the state is a product of class antagonisms and will become unnecessary when classes are abolished. He contrasts this with Aleksandrov's claim that the state must persist under socialism to "defend the gains of the revolution" — a formulation Grant identifies as a direct inversion of Marxism. The article also engages with the Marxist method of analysing the relationship between theory and class interest: the bureaucracy's revision of theory is not an intellectual error but a reflection of its material position as a parasitic layer standing above the working class. Grant situates this within the broader degeneration of the Soviet Union after Lenin's death, drawing on Trotsky's analysis of the bureaucratic degeneration and the theory of the deformed workers' state.

Conjunctural Relevance

The article was written in February 1946, immediately after the Second World War. The Soviet bureaucracy had emerged from the war with immense prestige, having led the Red Army to victory over Nazism. This prestige was used to consolidate its domestic position and to extend its influence into Eastern Europe. Aleksandrov's speech, delivered during the Lenin memorial meeting, was an official attempt to provide theoretical cover for the bureaucracy's refusal to democratise the Soviet state and to begin the transition to genuine socialism. Grant identifies this as a moment when the bureaucracy felt confident enough to openly break with Marxism, no longer needing to maintain even a formal allegiance to the classical theory. The conjuncture is one of post-war consolidation, where the bureaucracy's material interests — control over production, privilege, and power — required an ideological justification that could no longer be reconciled with Marxism.

Where the Argument Continues

This article is an early statement of a theme that runs through Ted Grant's entire body of work. It connects directly to his later writings on the nature of the Soviet Union, collected in the Ted Grant Archive on marxist.com. The argument is developed further in his analysis of the Stalinist regimes in Eastern Europe, the Sino-Soviet split, and the eventual collapse of the USSR. Grant's later work on the theory of the deformed workers' state, particularly his contributions to the founding documents of the Committee for a Workers' International, expands on the question of what kind of state the USSR was and what political tasks follow from that analysis. The article also anticipates the broader Marxist critique of Stalinism as a counter-revolutionary force, which is developed in other IDOM articles on the history of the Communist International and the struggle against bureaucratic degeneration.

Connections

This article should be read alongside Trotsky's The Revolution Betrayed, which provides the foundational analysis of the Soviet bureaucracy's rise. Lenin's The State and Revolution is the essential theoretical reference point for the classical Marxist position that Aleksandrov is revising. Within the IDOM corpus, the article connects to other pieces by Ted Grant on the nature of the Soviet Union, as well as to more recent analyses of Stalinism and post-Stalinist regimes. The broader tradition of Marxist state theory — from Marx's The Civil War in France through Engels, Lenin, and Trotsky — is the necessary context for understanding the stakes of Grant's argument.

Key Quotes

  1. "The state is the product of irreconcilable class antagonisms. It arises when society is split into classes, and it is the instrument of the ruling class for the suppression of the exploited. When classes disappear, the state will disappear with them."

  2. "Aleksandrov's speech represents a complete break with Marxism. It is an attempt to provide a theoretical justification for the continued existence of a privileged bureaucracy in the Soviet Union."

  3. "The bureaucracy needs a strong state to defend its privileges against the working class. Therefore it must revise Marxism to show that the state is necessary even after the abolition of classes."

  4. "The theory of Marx and Engels on the state is not a dogma. It is a guide to action. But the Stalinist bureaucracy has turned it into its opposite — a justification for the perpetuation of class rule."

  5. "The question of the state is not an academic one. It is the most practical question of the day for the working class of the Soviet Union and of the whole world."

  6. "The bureaucracy has abandoned Marxism in theory because it has abandoned the working class in practice. The two are inseparable."