I supposed that the idea of how it can be easier to accept the delusion of others might apply to Changez. If Changez is delusional, it might be in how he sees himself as a "threat" to the establishment and how he is pursued by the America. In some respects, this is easy to accept if one sees the world in the paradigm offered by the current proponents of the War on Terror. It seems that one of Hamid's primary motivations is to help facilitate a discussion about the text from the reader's point of view. Is Changez a terrorist? Is the American hunting him down? What is the driving force behind the ending? In these questions, it is difficult to ascertain what "the truth" is because it becomes evident that our own biases play a large role in how these elements are understood. For example, if one tends to see the world in the paradigm offered by the war on terror than Changez is right in that he is a threat and that the ending is one of death. If one sees the discourse between Changez and the American is one of pure discussion, this reveals elements about this point of view. It becomes easier to accept Changez's delusions based on the point of view one appropriates the novel, and the issues of terrorism, in general. In this context, I think that Hamid might be making a statement about perception and understanding in the current setting.