478
In reversal, Coast Guard again classifies swastikas, nooses as hate symbols
(www.washingtonpost.com)
this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2025
478 points (99.8% liked)
politics
26456 readers
2550 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
When they first banned the swastika in australia (2023?), nazis posted photos of them holding shields with 30 different nazi symbols on them.
Classifying these things as hate sumbols does nothing, but it will shortly turn around and outlaw communist symbols.
lol did i just say at first they came for the swastika? But seriously the people who initially pushed for these laws are racist cretins who want nazis marching beside them, under national flags.
Oh shut up
What it does in this context is make it a criminal act to get tattooed under ucmj. If they get caught with patches or drawing it or whatever they get enhanced punishments because of what it is.
What taking away the classification did is make it so it was no longer illegal to decorate military property with swastikas and such.
What a take from the .mler — don't you know not to speak unless Cowbee is already in the room? You should figure that out.
I agree and understand, but people here will read into the worst interpretation, both because reactionary feelings are easier to justify and because you have .ml
This is why the right-wing state media keeps pressing Mamdani and other politicians on their condemnation of particular terms, words and media personalities.
It's not because they actually care about promotion or condemnation of particular aesthetic symbols, slogans or phrases, it's because they desperately want to normalize policing these things. They want a country built on performative "crackdowns" against any kind of speech that they don't like. This is why we have freedom of expression held so sacred, because it goes both ways.
Yes, it is "at first they came for the swastika" because by itself a swastika is nothing, it's the way it's used and what the intention of its use means that's more important, but the right is learning that they can leverage reactionaries on both sides into promoting a culture of blanket censorship.
This whole thing with the Coast Guard and whoever else flip-flopping is just the outcome of a system that has been built to resist aesthetic politics feeling pulled in different directions. It has less to do with actual nazis and more to do with "are we political entities or do we serve the constitution."
The fact that it's now making a LOT of people on the left scream for greater policing of symbols is exactly what they wanted from this.
I think you're right about everything you've said, I think you're wrong to associate this with what the .mler said.
They would be perfectly fine with blanket censorship under communist rule.