In Part One of this book it was argued that contemporary terrorism constitutes a potential threat to the stability and, in the extreme, the existence of democratic states. While it is true that the existence of injustice or inequality within such states provides a fertile ground for the development of social movements which view terrorism as a legitimate tool for change it is not the case that the elimination of these evils (to the extent that such is possible) would necessarily eliminate the threat of terrorism. While such social improvements would reduce the incidence of terrorism, the increasing evidence of nihilistic philosophies and idiosyncratic motivations among terrorist groups combined with the disruptive/destructive potential inherent in nuclear, biological, and biochemical materials implies that we will always have to face policy choices other than prescriptions for social change.

This does not imply that governments can ignore or downgrade acknowledgement of social problems and policies designed to remedy them. Social injustice, unresponsive government, etc. may be objective causes of political violence, including terrorism. In reality, anyway, the future holds problems of a structural nature (for all types of political systems) which indicate that a truly just and equal society is little short of fanciful. Democratic states which strive for, but do not meet, just goals will be challenged in the future by those who demand change (where change may also include a return to a pre-existing order as opposed to a bold new future).