Tara Copp and Michelle Boorstein, in a Washington Post “exclusive” on Thursday (semi-gift link; Apple News+):

The U.S. Coast Guard will no longer classify the swastika — an emblem of fascism and white supremacy inextricably linked to the murder of millions of Jews and the deaths of more than 400,000 U.S. troops who died fighting in World War II — as a hate symbol, according to a new policy that takes effect next month.

Instead, the Coast Guard will classify the Nazi-era insignia as “potentially divisive” under its new guidelines. The policy, set to take effect Dec. 15, similarly downgrades the classification of nooses and the Confederate flag, though display of the latter remains banned, according to documents reviewed by The Washington Post.

This caused an uproar, as anyone with any sensibility would expect. The only ones who believed explicitly reclassifying Nazi symbols and nooses as merely “potentially divisive” was a good idea were Nazis and racists.

By late Thursday, the Coast Guard, in what The Washington Post called “a stunning and hasty reversal,” had changed their mind and their policy. Copp and Boorstein, joined by Hari Raj and Victoria Bisset, reported the change (semi-gift link; Apple News+):

The abrupt policy change occurred hours after The Washington Post first reported that the service was about to enact new harassment guidelines that downgraded the meaning of such symbols of fascism and racism, labeling them instead “potentially divisive.” That shift had been set to take effect Dec. 15.

In a memo to Coast Guard personnel, the service’s acting commandant, Adm. Kevin Lunday, said the policy document issued late Thursday night supersedes all previous guidance on the issue.

“Divisive or hate symbols and flags are prohibited,” Lunday wrote in his memo. “These symbols and flags include, but are not limited to, the following: a noose, a swastika, and any symbols or flags co-opted or adopted by hate-based groups as representations of supremacy, racial or religious intolerance, anti-semitism, or any other improper bias.”

Public outrage works.

With this regime, it’s all-too-easy to believe the worst: that the first revision of the policy was specifically meant to soften the Coast Guard’s stance on these symbols, with the goal of allowing them when they weren’t previously allowed. I don’t believe that’s the case, here. Rather, the update reads like a typical HR bureaucratese rewrite aimed at providing as much latitude as possible when interpreting the guidelines to prevent unintended consequences and bad-faith (or weaponized) abuse.

Chapter 11.A.3 of the guidelines states:

A symbol or flag is divisive if its public display adversely affects good order and discipline, unit cohesion, command climate, morale, or mission effectiveness.

So an item’s “divisiveness” already depends on the effect it has.

Meanwhile, 11.B.1 notes that “a noose, a swastika,” etc. are “[p]otentially divisive symbols and flags,” and 11.C.2 notes:

Displays that exist for an unquestionably legitimate purpose should not be subject to removal. Examples include state-sanctioned items or when the symbol or flag is only an incidental or minor component, such as in works of art, or in educational or historical displays […]

My read: because swastikas and nooses may appear “in works of art, or in educational or historical displays,” they couldn’t always be classified as “divisive,” as their divisiveness depends on the context. Thus “potentially.”

The updated memorandum (correctly) redefines nooses and swastikas as “divisive or hate symbols” that are “prohibited and shall be removed.” It also eliminates the “works of art, or in educational or historical displays” carve-out (leaving it only for the Confederate battle flag). While this is much clearer, I’m confident that some historical and educational artifact will soon get flagged as a “divisive or hate symbol” and removed—and we’ll see an uproar over that.

As I said, HR bureaucratese.