Editing Insider Explanation from Bob

'''Testimony of Bob Johnston, Government Intelligence Officer'''

''Toronto District Courtroom, May 17, 2100''

“My name is Bob Johnston, Intelligence Officer with the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service. For the past seven years, I’ve worked undercover in various institutions to monitor potential threats to national security. In 2098, I was assigned to the University of Toronto’s St. George campus to investigate concerns about growing dissent among students, particularly in relation to the mandatory Neurovance program. The provincial government had received reports of underground groups forming to oppose the program, though none seemed significant at the time.

Dr. Erwin Van der Wood was flagged as a person of interest early in my assignment. What initially drew our attention to him wasn’t radicalism—it was his popularity. Students idolized him. They referred to his lectures as transformative, and his personal charisma drew hundreds into his classes each semester. While it’s common for professors to have loyal followings, the level of devotion displayed by Dr. Van der Wood’s students raised suspicions.

I enrolled in his Introduction to Capitalism course under the alias Ryan Blakely, a third-year political science major. My mission was to observe and report on any activities that might threaten public safety or the integrity of the Neurovance program. At first, the lectures seemed normal. Van der Wood was articulate, witty, and intellectually stimulating. He challenged students to think critically about capitalism and the systems governing their lives. However, over time, his rhetoric became darker, more pointed.

By the fifth week of the semester, I began to notice subtle changes in his approach. He would introduce controversial ideas not as hypotheticals, but as moral imperatives. For example, during a lecture on wealth distribution, he didn’t simply question the ethics of capitalism—he declared it a disease, a parasitic force that had to be eradicated for humanity to survive. What alarmed me most was how receptive the students were to these ideas, particularly after taking their prescribed doses of Neurovance.

Neurovance was supposed to enhance focus and learning, but in Van der Wood’s classroom, it became a weapon. He knew exactly how to exploit the drug’s effects. His lectures were structured to overwhelm students with emotionally charged language and vivid imagery, leaving them no time to question or process what they were hearing. By the end of each class, students weren’t just agreeing with him—they were parroting his words verbatim.

Outside of lectures, Van der Wood’s influence extended further. He invited select students to private ‘study groups’ at his home. I managed to gain entry to one of these sessions, which turned out to be nothing short of indoctrination. The atmosphere was almost cult-like. He dimmed the lights, played somber classical music, and spoke in a tone that felt more like a sermon than a discussion. He described capitalism as a “modern slavery” and framed the government’s Neurovance mandate as proof of a dystopian conspiracy to control free thought.

At these gatherings, he would distribute pamphlets filled with incendiary content—diagrams of economic systems labeled as exploitative, quotes from historical anarchists, and even sketches of protest plans. He encouraged students to spread these materials discreetly, warning them about ‘government spies’ who sought to undermine their ‘awakening.’ Ironic, considering my presence.

By the eighth week, the situation had escalated. Van der Wood began openly advocating for action. During one session, he unveiled what he called the ‘Blueprint for Liberation,’ a step-by-step guide to dismantling capitalist institutions, starting with the university itself. He spoke of protests, sabotage, and eventually, outright rebellion. It was then that I realized this was no longer a philosophical exercise—Van der Wood was planning something tangible, something dangerous.

Despite my growing unease, I had to maintain my cover. Reporting back to my superiors was a delicate process, as any sign of suspicion could have compromised the operation. I used encrypted messages to inform them of his plans, but by the time they authorized intervention, it was too late.

March 16, 2099, started like any other day on campus, but the tension was palpable. The night before, Van der Wood had sent a message to his inner circle—a call to arms. He instructed them to gather outside the Gerstein Science Information Centre at noon, armed with makeshift weapons. Their objective: to seize control of the building and use it as a base for their movement.

I was present that day, watching from the crowd as chaos unfolded. Students, many of whom I recognized from his lectures, stormed the library with frightening precision. They moved as a unit, shouting slogans about liberation and justice. The violence that followed was unlike anything I’d ever witnessed. Windows shattered, fires erupted, and innocent bystanders were caught in the crossfire.

I attempted to de-escalate the situation, pulling students aside and urging them to leave before the police arrived. Some listened, but many were too far gone, their loyalty to Van der Wood unwavering. The professor himself was conspicuously absent from the scene. He had sent his students to fight his battle while he stayed behind, safely hidden.

When the dust settled, thirty lives had been lost, and the Gerstein Centre lay in ruins. The Glendonites, as the group came to be known, scattered into the shadows, leaving behind a campus and a city in mourning.

Van der Wood was apprehended later that evening at his home. When authorities raided the property, they found detailed plans for further attacks, along with a cache of propaganda materials and what appeared to be a prototype device designed to disrupt Neurovance’s effects. His journals provided chilling insight into his mindset—a man convinced he was a savior, blind to the destruction he had wrought.

Looking back, I can’t help but wonder if we could have acted sooner. Van der Wood was a product of his time, shaped by a society that prioritized productivity over humanity. Neurovance may have extended attention spans, but at what cost? In our pursuit of efficiency, we created a generation vulnerable to manipulation, a reality Van der Wood exploited to devastating effect.

As I sit here today, recounting these events, I urge this court to consider the broader implications of this case. Van der Wood is undoubtedly guilty of his crimes, but he is also a symptom of a broken system. If we fail to address the underlying issues—the dehumanization of education, the unchecked use of cognitive enhancement drugs—we risk creating more individuals like him. And next time, we might not be so lucky.”