If provoking confrontation is indeed the endgame, the logical next step would be trying to shut down the interstate highway system.
They are not merely trying to sabotage the economy, in the same way that Hitler didn’t just order the Reichstag burnt.
The point is to plausibly blame their enemies in order to scapegoat them.
“Tea Party terrorists” in Congress who refused to budge on the debt limit will be blamed for the riots that follow a cutoff of welfare benefits.
And by extension, all Constitutional conservatives.
It won't be to shut it down but to place checkpoints to regulate traffic in and out of the burning cities. The highways are also needed to preposition Obama's civilian army in the peripheral suburbs to "protect" them from roaming looters and mobs. The suburbs and small towns are viewed as the enemy heartland. Curfews and weapon seizures to prevent vigilantism against city dwelling marauders will follow prepositioning. A few staged events and you have a Hurricane Katrina type excuse for disarming citizens. I'm sure this administration has its own think tank working out the strategy and tactics. Isn't that what "czars" are for?
Why do you think SUVs and 4x4 pickups have been demonized all these years? It's not for the gas mileage! If you own a 4x4 you don't NEED a highway to E&E (Escape & Evade) from a tyrant. It's the very definition of an "off road" event. This also ties into gun control. If you have no way to get to the remote hunting grounds you have no further use for your long range sniper deer rifle! Bambi can therefore rest easier. So can the tyrant.
I think the “end game” is supposed to be a North Korea-type country where the government is so entrenched that mass starvation won’t even threaten them.
That would be no big deal. We'd all be chatting about on the internet and damning Obama's America to hell, complete with death threats to any and all federal officers.
Now, on the other hand, the internet ...