the author of that article is also misrepresenting the views of kropotkin (and others) on the topic of "human nature", and even goes so far as to contradict the thrust of the article by actually quoting kropotkin, which is a little ironic given the prose.

kropotkin, like most liberal-leftists of the era, including most socialists and most anarchists, accepted a tabula rasa concept of human nature, stemming ultimately from rousseau. he wasn't a hobbesian. he didn't believe in original sin.

it's an anachronism, but we're standing in 2019 and not 1899, so we should just go ahead and cite gramsci, which we mostly get via chomsky & herman, nowadays. we're in a weird period, where people don't really read anymore, and consequently don't really hold consistent politics; people that call themselves leftists nowadays no longer seem to really care if they're just a mess of contradictions, as products of capitalism, themselves. but, the standard leftist position on human nature, which kropotkin held like everybody else, is supposed to be something like this:

1) humans have no fixed nature. tabula rasa.
2) but, capitalism is evil. and, the capitalist class controls how we think, through it's dominance of education and media.
3) therefore, we're taught to be complete pieces of shit from the time we're born. that is the reason we're assholes - the system teaches us to be assholes.
4) to reverse this, you need to abolish the system.

and, then what? well, then we have a debate is what. do we embrace an anti-intellectualism and demand that education is abolished altogether, in fears that it will teach us to be evil all over again? that's the primitivist position, and it's out there, but it's hard for anybody to take seriously, unless you have a fetish for the dark ages. more often is that anarchists tend to push concepts of decentralization, horizontalism and radical levels of democracy, when it comes to education. i've published a short work on what i think an anarchist grade school ought to be like to my appspot site on the side.

so, you're going to see a lot of debate and a lot of dissent on the topic, actually. it's one of the points where we have as many different approaches as we have different strains of anarchism.

but, the commonality on the anarchist left is supposed to be a combination of rousseaulian tabula rasa with gramscian social conditioning, and a consensus that you have to abolish the state to undo the programming. kropotkin's views fall pretty much in the centre of that consensus, even if some of the language that we use nowadays postdates him.