You want more Trump? This is how you get more Trump.

Inauguration Protesters Plan To Destroy Property And Disrupt Balls

On the day of President-elect Donald Trump’s inauguration protesters are planning an anti-capitalist march, road blockades and disruptions to inauguration balls. The protests will likely include property destruction, a source with intimate knowledge of the protest plans told The Daily Caller Friday.

The blockades are not limited to roads but will also be at every security checkpoint, the source said. The source added that the protesters blockading each checkpoint will represent a different liberal cause such as climate change or money in politics.

A group called #DisruptJ20 is the most active in the planned protests for the inauguration.

And what is the point of all this? It is not to nudge the Trump administration toward moderation, and the demonstrators know it. The rank and file (the "useful idiots" to the organizers) are gripped by what Lee Harris described years ago as "fantasy ideology," in a different context, and which he described this way:

My first encounter with this particular kind of fantasy occurred when I was in college in the late sixties. A friend of mine and I got into a heated argument. Although we were both opposed to the Vietnam War, we discovered that we differed considerably on what counted as permissible forms of anti-war protest. To me the point of such protest was simple — to turn people against the war. Hence anything that was counterproductive to this purpose was politically irresponsible and should be severely censured. My friend thought otherwise; in fact, he was planning to join what by all accounts was to be a massively disruptive demonstration in Washington, and which in fact became one.

My friend did not disagree with me as to the likely counterproductive effects of such a demonstration. Instead, he argued that this simply did not matter. His answer was that even if it was counterproductive, even if it turned people against war protesters, indeed even if it made them more likely to support the continuation of the war, he would still participate in the demonstration and he would do so for one simple reason — because it was, in his words, good for his soul.

What I saw as a political act was not, for my friend, any such thing. It was not aimed at altering the minds of other people or persuading them to act differently. Its whole point was what it did for him.

And what it did for him was to provide him with a fantasy — a fantasy, namely, of taking part in the revolutionary struggle of the oppressed against their oppressors. By participating in a violent anti-war demonstration, he was in no sense aiming at coercing conformity with his view — for that would still have been a political objective. Instead, he took his part in order to confirm his ideological fantasy of marching on the right side of history, of feeling himself among the elect few who stood with the angels of historical inevitability. Thus, when he lay down in front of hapless commuters on the bridges over the Potomac, he had no interest in changing the minds of these commuters, no concern over whether they became angry at the protesters or not. They were there merely as props, as so many supernumeraries in his private psychodrama. The protest for him was not politics, but theater; and the significance of his role lay not in the political ends his actions might achieve, but rather in their symbolic value as ritual. In short, he was acting out a fantasy.

It was not your garden-variety fantasy of life as a sexual athlete or a racecar driver, but in it, he nonetheless made himself out as a hero — a hero of the revolutionary struggle. The components of his fantasy — and that of many young intellectuals at that time — were compounded purely of ideological ingredients, smatterings of Marx and Mao, a little Fanon and perhaps a dash of Herbert Marcuse.

For want of a better term, call the phenomenon in question a fantasy ideology — by which I mean, political and ideological symbols and tropes used not for political purposes, but entirely for the benefit of furthering a specific personal or collective fantasy.

That is their fantasy, that they are heroes of the revolutionary struggle. But what about the leaders and organizers? Trust me: somewhere, and not in the open, are the suits whose idea this really is. What motivates them?

Money, of course. That's their objective and they have no fantasy about it: "You want a demonstration in Washington? Pay me." They may have even voted for Trump, not because they agree with him or like him - quite the opposite - but because how could you turn out 100,000 misguided, fantastical ideologues on Jan. 20 to protest Hillary Clinton? Who's going to pay for that?

Follow the money and you'll learn why this demonstration is really laid on.