The Individual and the Marxist View of History¶
Core Argument¶
The article argues that Marxism does not deny the role of individuals in shaping history, but insists that even the most exceptional individuals operate within material constraints set by the class struggle, the level of productive forces, and the balance of social forces. The central thesis is that history is made by masses pursuing their aims under definite conditions, and that "great individuals" emerge not because of personal genius alone but because they express needs that have already become historically necessary. The article rejects both the "great man" theory of bourgeois historiography and the mechanical determinism falsely attributed to Marxism, instead advancing a dialectical understanding of accident and necessity, objective conditions and subjective agency.
Theoretical Grounding¶
The analysis draws on classical Marxist texts: Marx's 18th Brumaire ("Men make their own history, but not as they please"), Engels's letters on historical materialism (particularly to Bloch and Borgius), Plekhanov's On the Role of the Individual in History, and Trotsky's History of the Russian Revolution and The Revolution Betrayed. The article situates itself within the tradition of historical materialism as developed by Marx, Engels, and the Russian revolutionary Marxists, opposing both the voluntarism of the Narodniks and anarchists and the fatalism of economistic interpretations. The key theoretical move is the application of the dialectic of accident and necessity: the emergence of a particular individual is accidental, but the emergence of some leader at critical junctures is necessary. This is grounded in Engels's observation that if Napoleon had been absent, another would have filled the place.
Conjunctural Relevance¶
The article connects its theoretical argument to the contemporary conjuncture in several ways. It analyses the rise of Trump and Le Pen not as accidents of personality but as products of political polarisation and the collapse of the liberal centre. It contrasts these reactionary figures with Corbyn and Sanders, arguing that their sudden prominence after decades of marginality reflects mass anger against the establishment — they are "riding the wave of history." The article also draws parallels between the current period and the 1930s, noting that the objective conditions for revolution have "not only ripened but begun to get somewhat rotten" (quoting Trotsky's Transitional Programme). The crisis of leadership — the absence of a revolutionary party — is identified as the decisive subjective factor holding back transformation, with the article positioning the International Marxist Tendency as the organisation needed to channel the radical energy of workers and youth.
Where the Argument Continues¶
The article opens several lines of argument that are developed elsewhere in the IDOM corpus and broader Marxist tradition. The analysis of Bonapartism and Caesarism as recurring forms of "strongman" rule in periods of class deadlock is treated more extensively in Trotsky's The Revolution Betrayed and in IDOM articles on contemporary Bonapartism (e.g., analyses of Modi, Bolsonaro, and Trump). The discussion of deformed workers' states in the colonial revolutions references Ted Grant's seminal article "The Colonial Revolutions and the Deformed Workers' States," which is essential reading for understanding the argument about objective necessity producing distorted outcomes in the absence of correct leadership. The question of the relationship between the individual and the party — Lenin's role versus the Bolshevik Party's collective work — is explored in greater depth in Trotsky's Stalin (chapter VII) and in IDOM's educational series on the history of the Bolshevik Party. The article's concluding call for building a revolutionary organisation points toward the IMT's ongoing work and the Against the Stream podcast's regular analyses of the current conjuncture.
Connections¶
This article should be read alongside Plekhanov's On the Role of the Individual in History (the direct theoretical source), Trotsky's History of the Russian Revolution (especially the preface and the chapter on the death agony of the monarchy), and Engels's letters on historical materialism (particularly to Bloch and Borgius). Within the IDOM corpus, it connects to articles on the centenary of the Russian Revolution, analyses of contemporary Bonapartism, and the ongoing series on historical materialism. The theoretical framework also connects to Marx's The Holy Family (on history as the activity of man pursuing his aims) and The 18th Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte (on men making history under conditions not of their choosing). For the question of Stalinism and the bureaucracy, Trotsky's The Revolution Betrayed is the indispensable companion text.
Key Quotes¶
-
"History does nothing, it possesses no immense wealth, it wages no battles. It is man, real, living man who does all that, who possesses and fights; 'history' is not, as it were, a person apart, using man as a means to achieve its own aims; history is nothing but the activity of man pursuing his aims." (Marx and Engels, The Holy Family)
-
"That such and such a man and precisely that man arises at that particular time in that given country is of course pure accident. But cut him out and there will be a demand for a substitute, and this substitute will be found, good or bad, but in the long run he will be found." (Engels to Borgius, 25 January 1894)
-
"The scripts for the rôles of Romanov and Capet were prescribed by the general development of the historic drama; only the nuances of interpretation fell to the lot of the actors." (Trotsky, History of the Russian Revolution)
-
"Similar (of course, far from identical) irritations in similar conditions call out similar reflexes; the more powerful the irritation, the sooner it overcomes personal peculiarities. To a tickle, people react differently, but to a red-hot iron, alike." (Trotsky, History of the Russian Revolution)
-
"Without a guiding organisation, the energy of the masses would dissipate like steam not enclosed in a piston-box. But nevertheless what moves things is not the piston or the box, but the steam." (Trotsky, History of the Russian Revolution, Preface)
-
"The basis of bureaucratic rule is the poverty of society in objects of consumption, with the resulting struggle of each against all. When there is enough goods in a store, the purchasers can come whenever they want to. When there is little goods, the purchasers are compelled to stand in line. When the lines are very long, it is necessary to appoint a policeman to keep order. Such is the starting point of the power of the Soviet bureaucracy." (Trotsky, The Revolution Betrayed, chapter V)