The "Intentionally destroying the economy" rhetoric is too over-the-top for me. There are undoubtedly a tiny number of holdout Marxist/Leninist types in the Democrat intelligentsia who really would like that, but I don't think it's true of any of the principal public players are among them. A truly destroyed economy would take all of them down with it, after all, since while they are at the controls the blame for that would be inescapable for them despite the 'Bush's fault' mantra.
Certainly many of them have a casual indifference to civil liberties except for those of their own ilk, but that problem exists across the whole political spectrum, it really isn't unique to them. Think about it, after all - their following depends on entitlements, and a truly destroyed economy produces nothing from which to draw the transfer payments necessary to fund those entitlements. Even the most entitlement-addicted plantation Democrat can tell the difference between getting 'gubmint munny' and standing in a three-block line for a bread ration (The latter being the outcome of a destroyed economy), and at that point even most of them would rebel or just revert to a complete social chaotic every-man-for-himself approach; in such conditions there is no loyalty to the past, and even a far-right-wing despot would be appealing to people as an alternative to continued disorder.
No, what we are dealing with is colossal, arrogant ignorance, based on economic theories that are totally without relation to reality or consistent with any historical experience. It is a Utopian experiment writ large, and by children who only partially understand even their own cock-eyed theory, which they follow only to the extent of its promises without grasping any of the issues, costs, or assumptions inherent to it.
They are not people of ill will. They are more dangerous than that.