Bakunin has this peculiarly bloodless, pedantic style that it's hard to square with his fierce reputation, until suddenly these limpid jewels drop through: "I am truly free only when all human beings, men and women, are equally free. The freedom of other men, far from negating or limiting my freedom, is, on the contrary, its necessary premise and confirmation." And punchy as that is, it's also a little bit obvious--you get excited based on the expression and a general sense of good will, rather than the sentiment--but he's just using it to pry open the door to a discussion of the inevitably social nature of freedom, and the social expectations and demands that restrict us in healthier and yet more fundamental ways than the State ever could. And this is Bakunin's quarrel with the liberal bourgeoisie--unlike Marx, it is not that they always sell the revolution out, that they want freedom and security for themselves and no others; or rather, the sell-out is part of it, but for Bakunin, it comes as an inevitable result of the relinquishing of sovereignty (by choice or, as he believes it always is, by conquest) to an oppressive third party rather than its pooling in a free and local political association, by us for us. Basically the difference here is between a society based on we and you and one in which a third power intervenes--a society of us and them, or us and it. The first one is viable, the second only a crucible for rebellion. This is of interest. ( )