Conrad introduces the Professor via a confrontational meeting with Ossipon. This dialogue between the two parties echoes Verloc’s conversation with Vladimir, as neither man particularly agrees with nor even likes the other. They meet, however, because they feel that they are in service of some higher cause (whether that is ideology, money, or something altogether more selfish). The Professor is particularly suited to this form of exposition because he is a confrontational man. His fierce commitment to his bombs is what makes him dangerous. He understands that he is not physically imposing, so he enjoys the power that he acquires when everyone knows that he carries a bomb with him at all times. He is willing to risk his life to project this intimidating sense of power. To feel dangerous, he needs people to believe that he poses a danger. This echoes Vladimir’s plan: to make people fear anarchism in order to suppress anarchism. The Professor is not only constantly armed with a bomb but with his fierce ideas. He describes his nihilistic view of the world, in which the weak constantly hold back the strong; he therefore articulates the text’s messages about Exploitation Due to Unequal Power Structures. This personal ideology has nothing to do with the egalitarian ideals of anarchism, but the Professor is associated with the anarchists nonetheless. He is committed to physical destruction, an extension of the social demolition that the anarchists want to inflict with his bombs. The Professor represents an ideology, and his sincerity is exactly what makes him so dangerous. Alone among the radicals, he has a consistent, if somewhat horrifying, philosophy.

Across this section, the narrative focus is passed from character to character like a baton. Verloc begins as the focal perspective. At the meeting, this then switches to Ossipon. When Ossipon meets with the Professor, the narration moves to focus on the Professor. When the Professor meets Chief Inspector Heat, the attention then switches to Heat. From Heat, the narrative focus then switches to the Assistant Commissioner. This shifting of narrative focus crosses an ideological divide. Jumping from Verloc to Ossipon to the Professor keeps the focus firmly on the side of the radicals. When this switches to Heat and the Assistant Commissioner, however, Conrad portrays the world from a different perspective. The latter two are on the other side of the supposed ideological divide, as they are committed to the preservation of the extant social order rather than to revolution. At the same time, the novel consistently depicts the characters as flawed individuals, regardless of where they sit politically. Heat is an intelligent man, but he is egotistical and brash—he is as zealously committed to the maintenance of the law as he believes the anarchists are to destroying everything. The Assistant Commissioner is a competent figure, but he regrets that he has to be in England rather than abroad. Each character views themselves as the moral center of the society. They may commit immoral acts, they concede, but they do so for the greater good. Every character believes that they alone understand the world and know how to make it better. Conrad hence undermines the divisions within society by shedding a sardonic light on the similarities of opposing parties.

Conrad draws attention to class structures in the interactions between the Assistant Commissioner and Heat: Heat is a working-class policeman, while the Assistant Commissioner is from a higher social rank. He was awarded the position of colonial administrator and, when he returned to Britain, he was quickly given a place in the civil service. His uncertainty about where he wants to be introduces the theme of The Impact of Colonialism on National Identity. The Assistant Commissioner gets invited to the good parties, at least through his wife, signifying that he operates in a different social circle than a policeman like Heat. Ironically, the upper classes are more tolerant of the anarchists than zealous men like Heat. Seemingly, they do not feel that the social order is truly threatened. To them, the current power dynamics between rich and poor seem immutable, and they cannot conceive of a successful revolution. The female benefactor of Michaelis is a key example of this attitude. To Heat, Michaelis is a threat to society. To the wealthy lady, Michaelis is an oddity and an amusement. She funds his writing and treats him almost like a pet, whose sole purpose is to amuse her with his outlandish ideas about equality. She cannot even imagine a world in which she is not rich and powerful. Ironically, she cannot imagine the world about which she funds Michaelis to write. While Conrad highlights the ineffectiveness of anarchists, he also exposes the naiveté of the upper classes.