Peter Kropotkin, the wise "anarchist prince," in response to a letter from the tireless anarchist historian Max Nettlau, expresses his objections regarding whether "individualist anarchism" can contribute to the struggle for human liberation.

Kropotkin's political philosophy, steadfastly focused on Mutual Aid, Solidarity, Anarcho-Communism, and Social Liberation, rightly reacts against any attempt at liberating the Ego that does not take into account that a free person in an unfree society cannot exist.

On the other hand, in this current letter, perhaps with excessive severity, Kropotkin does not consider that "individual rebellion," the iconoclastic and destructive criticism launched by brilliant minds of past eras against every accepted authority and power, against centuries-old prejudices and conformist mentalities, constitutes a revolutionary event of utmost value in itself. And if it is not sufficient alone, without the rebellion of the masses themselves –as Kropotkin rightly points out– for universal liberation, the blame does not lie solely with the bearers of this individual attitude; at least not more than it lies with the proponents of a social, anarcho-syndicalist, and pro-worker perspective regarding whether the vast majority of the masses stubbornly keep their ears closed to the call for social revolution.

What could be the solution –if we assume that a definitive one may exist– to this critical antinomy that seems to have troubled anarchist thought for a long time and has preoccupied many anarchists?