On the Role of the Individual in History

Plekhanov’s philosophical work of criticizing Narodniks and defending historical materialism. It was first published in the third and fourth issues of Nauchnoye Obrozhniye magazine in 1898, and was included in Vol. 8 of Collected Works of Plekhanov in 1920s.

Plekhanov criticized the fatalist conception of history and worship of heroes, expounded on the Marxist view on the role of the individual in history from the perspective of theory and methodology. The book is comprised of eight parts.

On the materialist conception of history and the recognition of the role of the individual in history. The subjective idealists, represented by Mikhailovsky, attacked dialectical materialism by claiming that dialectical materialism is a doctrine which sacrifices all other factors on behalf of the economic “factor” and negates the role of individual in history, and justifies impassivity or “quietism”. First, Plekhanov pointed out that Mikhailovsky presents the tendency of eclecticism, because in his eyes, the factor of emotion and the factor of reason are equally important.

Secondly, Plekhanov pointed out that dialectical materialism does not approve fatalism and never cancels the independent role of individuals in history. Thirdly, Plekhanov asserted that “quietism” would merely be abstention from unnecessary, i.e., useless, action and would have no affinity with true quietism.

About freedom and necessity. First of all, Plekhanov pointed out that freedom is the necessity that is known and vice versa. is identical with freedom and vice versa. The key to realize and achieve the identity of freedom and necessity lies in getting rid of the dualist opposition of subject and object, theory and reality in philosophical thinking. By obscuring the conception of necessity, the idea of freedom itself became extremely dim and a very poor comfort.

Secondly, there are two attitudes to the necessity of certain phenomena. One is to have a positive attitude towards the arrival of specific phenomena. Some of the people who hold this attitude are greatly inspired by the fact that their intentions and ideals are subjective manifestations of objective necessity. The other is to oppose the arrival of specific phenomena. In the face of a large number of objective conditions for the realization of inevitable phenomena, those who hold this attitude weaken their perseverance in resistance.

About the role of the individual in history. Subjectivists believe that individuals play a very important role in history. Plekhanov pointed out that the subjectivists did not solve the problem of the role of the individual in history, or even set the problem correctly, because the subjectivists opposed the activities of “critically thinking individuals” to the influence of the laws of social and historical movements. First, he criticizes the viewpoint of exaggerating the historical role of outstanding figures and denying historical necessity, criticizes the view of German historians such as Karl Lamprecht and French historians of the Restoration period from the the 19th century that exaggerates the historical necessity and denies the historical role of outstanding figures, and expounds the relationship between the role of the individual in history and social conditions. Plekhanov insisted that individuals play an important role in history, and the exertion of this role is restricted by social relations. Second, the relationship between contingency and necessity.

Through the analysis of historical facts, Plekhanov obtained the function of personal characteristics, personality, physique, ability and other accidental factors in history. Contingency is a relative thing, which only appears at the intersection of various inevitable processes and cannot exist in isolation without necessity. Third, individuals play a role in the need and permission of social relations. The impact of individuals on society is determined by the internal structure of that society and by its relation to other societies. The final cause for the change of social relations lies in the state of the productive forces. Fourth, outstanding people can change the individual appearance and partial results of the incident, but they cannot change the general direction of the incident. Fifthly, there are two conditions for outstanding people to influence the process of the incident: one is that the talents of outstanding people are more suitable for the social needs of the times; the other is that the realistic social system does not block the development of outstanding people.

On the causes of the historical movement and the greatness of outstanding figures, Plekhanov pointed out that the power of historical events is neither from heaven nor from human desire. Human nature is not the last and most general cause of historical movement. What determines the direction of historical process is the development of productive forces and the relationship between men in the process of social and economic production determined by this development. The greatness of an outstanding person lies in that his characteristics can serve the social needs of the times. History is made by the social man, who is its sole factor.

The book has criticized two wrong conceptions of history of exaggerating the role of the individual, denying the law of social development as well as exaggerating the law of social history and belittling the role of the individual, expounded the problem of the role of the individual in history and enriched and developed Marxist theory.