"Insecurity is fantastic" revisited

The usual paranoia warning applies here ("Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"), but some things are so stupid that they look a lot like deliberate sabotage:

One disconcerting possibility is that figures such as Fox and Rees-Mogg might be willing to believe the dismal economic forecasts, but look on them as an attraction.

This isn’t as implausible as it may sound. Since the 1960s, conservatism has been defined partly by a greater willingness to inflict harm, especially in the English-speaking world. The logic is that the augmentation of the postwar welfare state by the moral pluralism of the 1960s produced an acute problem of ‘moral hazard’, whereby benign policies ended up being taken for granted and abused. Once people believe things can be had for free and take pleasure in abundance, there is a risk of idleness and hedonism.

Remember, Peter Hargreaves, the stockbroker who spent £3.2 million on funding Leave.EU, said this in an unguarded moment before the referendum:

...a vote to leave would create uncertainty in the UK.

 But he argued that was what the country needed, saying it "would be the biggest stimulus to get our butts in gear that we have ever had".

"It will be like Dunkirk again," he said. "We will get out there and we will be become incredibly successful because we will be insecure again. And insecurity is fantastic."

Are they just trying to "take back control" in an incredibly inefficient way? Or are they deliberately conspiring to make our lives insecure in a very efficient way?