The U.S. Coast Guard just lately introduced adjustments to its insurance policies regarding hate and harassment, enjoyable its prohibitions towards racist and antisemitic symbols. The adjustments have sparked outrage and condemnation, main the Coast Guard to scramble to regulate or make clear its insurance policies within the face of public opposition.
Coast Guard weakens insurance policies on show of hate symbols
The Washington Submit first reported Thursday that the Coast Guard would not classify nooses or the swastika as hate symbols regardless of their lengthy associations with racism and systematic violence. The brand new insurance policies indicated that the show of symbols just like the swastika or noose could be thought-about “probably divisive.”
That is weaker language than insurance policies put in place by the Coast Guard in 2019, declaring that “the show or depiction of an emblem extensively recognized with oppression or hatred is a possible hate incident, together with however not restricted to the show of a noose, a swastika, supremacist symbols, Accomplice symbols or flags, and anti-Semitic symbols.”
The 2019 coverage, issued by Admiral Karl L. Schultz, then the Coast Guard Commandant, “directed commanding officers to research these shows and licensed them to take away divisive symbols when warranted, even when the show doesn’t quantity to a hate incident.”
Different adjustments calm down the prohibition on harassment, hazing
The revisions to Coast Guard coverage additionally relaxed requirements for harassment, eradicating gender id as a protected class towards harassment and declaring that any harassment on the premise of protected classes akin to race or gender was solely punishable if it was deemed “extreme or pervasive.”
The brand new insurance policies additionally replicate Secretary of Protection Pete Hegseth’s permissive stance on hazing by stipulating that hazing might serve “a correct army or different governmental objective.” After the Washington Submit’s story led to questions and criticisms in regards to the new insurance policies, Admiral Kevin Lunday, who was appointed by Trump to function the Coast Guard’s appearing commandant, claimed that the revised coverage didn’t change the way in which that hate symbols could be handled, saying that shows of symbols just like the noose or swastika “might be completely investigated and severely punished.”
Trump administration defends, assaults, then backtracks
As outrage endured over the altered insurance policies, the Trump administration began to query the validity of reporting on the problem. Lunday tweeted that “The claims that the U.S. Coast Guard will not classify swastikas, nooses or different extremist imagery as prohibited symbols are categorically false.” A spokesperson for the Division of Homeland Safety, which homes the Coast Guard, mentioned that the Washington Submit “must be embarrassed it printed this pretend crap.” Nonetheless, Lunday issued a brand new memo later Thursday afternoon. This newest doc reads, partly, “Divisive or hate symbols and flags are prohibited. These symbols and flags embrace, however aren’t restricted to, the next: a noose, a swastika, and any symbols or flags co-opted or adopted by hate-based teams as representations of supremacy, racial or non secular intolerance, anti-semitism, or another improper bias.”
Democratic Congresswoman Lauren Underwood of Illinois was one of many lawmakers who objected to the adjustments. “At present it was revealed that the Coast Guard would not classify swastikas and nooses as hate symbols. Unacceptable,” she tweeted Thursday night. The Congresswoman added, “I simply met with Admiral Lunday, and received his committment to publish a brand new coverage. Hate has no place in our armed providers.” It isn’t clear if her assembly occurred earlier than or after Lunday distributed the newest doc.
The Coast Guard is making an attempt to painting this newest assertion as merely a restatement of the coverage that was issued earlier this month. However for a lot of, it appears that evidently the army department’s management is as a substitute reacting to widespread condemnation of its hate coverage revisions, backtracking on its choice and reaffirming its prior ban on hate symbols.
About The Author
