Alt US Coast Guard
@altcoast.altgov.info
Sharing news from the Coast Guard, the Federal Government, and beyond.
Semper Paratus, Semper Pro Populus (Always Ready, Always for the People).
Not affiliated with Official USCG. Views are solely my own opinions. #AltGov 🥄
Semper Paratus, Semper Pro Populus (Always Ready, Always for the People).
Not affiliated with Official USCG. Views are solely my own opinions. #AltGov 🥄
Noem has made some very concerning decisions and seems completely on board with Hegseth's changes to the military so this could be direction from that part of DHS, rather than from within the CG. But it could also be an internal decision. We won't know unless someone decides to share that.
November 21, 2025 at 8:36 PM
Noem has made some very concerning decisions and seems completely on board with Hegseth's changes to the military so this could be direction from that part of DHS, rather than from within the CG. But it could also be an internal decision. We won't know unless someone decides to share that.
I don't have any special knowledge on this but it is a plausible theory. ADM Lunday stepped into a challenging position, seeing ADM Fagan unceremoniously removed as Commandant. I don't know enough about him to make a value judgment but from what I've heard, he isn't a bad guy.
November 21, 2025 at 8:35 PM
I don't have any special knowledge on this but it is a plausible theory. ADM Lunday stepped into a challenging position, seeing ADM Fagan unceremoniously removed as Commandant. I don't know enough about him to make a value judgment but from what I've heard, he isn't a bad guy.
Trust me, I'm right there with you... It's hard when people dismiss things as alarmist rhetoric so casually, but we've seen exactly what can happen to our communities.
November 21, 2025 at 7:04 PM
Trust me, I'm right there with you... It's hard when people dismiss things as alarmist rhetoric so casually, but we've seen exactly what can happen to our communities.
It isn't really a reversal, just a clarification. They will still be moving these cases to the command level rather than dealing with them centrally. Which removes a lot of accountability, particularly at units where these symbols might be more accepted by command staff.
November 21, 2025 at 6:41 PM
It isn't really a reversal, just a clarification. They will still be moving these cases to the command level rather than dealing with them centrally. Which removes a lot of accountability, particularly at units where these symbols might be more accepted by command staff.
That's exactly what I'm assuming the purpose of this is. Hegseth has made it clear that he's moving towards that with the rest of the military. They want to be able to choose which cases they care about.
The statement they made looks good, but I don't know that it will assure accountability.
The statement they made looks good, but I don't know that it will assure accountability.
November 21, 2025 at 6:39 PM
That's exactly what I'm assuming the purpose of this is. Hegseth has made it clear that he's moving towards that with the rest of the military. They want to be able to choose which cases they care about.
The statement they made looks good, but I don't know that it will assure accountability.
The statement they made looks good, but I don't know that it will assure accountability.
That was a thought I had too, but I was worried it might come across as paranoid or alarmist. It does seem like it could be opening it up for ANY flag to be classified as divisive. But I believe pride flags are already disallowed (I could be wrong) so this may just be more reinforcement of that.
November 21, 2025 at 6:25 PM
That was a thought I had too, but I was worried it might come across as paranoid or alarmist. It does seem like it could be opening it up for ANY flag to be classified as divisive. But I believe pride flags are already disallowed (I could be wrong) so this may just be more reinforcement of that.
Okay! So, to clarify, I'm seeing that the CG's new memo is a prohibition on "divisive or hate symbols and flags." This is a clarification, not a reversal of policy. The decisions are still going to be handled more at the command level, but they are stating that these symbols are still unacceptable.
November 21, 2025 at 6:06 PM
Okay! So, to clarify, I'm seeing that the CG's new memo is a prohibition on "divisive or hate symbols and flags." This is a clarification, not a reversal of policy. The decisions are still going to be handled more at the command level, but they are stating that these symbols are still unacceptable.
Hi, there's a lot more information out about this now. I made a post explaining. bsky.app/profile/altc...
(1/9) The CG and Hate Symbols: What We Know So Far (a thread).
Yesterday, WaPo reported that the CG has removed swastikas, confederate flags, and nooses from a list of "hate symbols". This is both technically correct, and an oversimplification.
Yesterday, WaPo reported that the CG has removed swastikas, confederate flags, and nooses from a list of "hate symbols". This is both technically correct, and an oversimplification.
November 21, 2025 at 5:49 PM
Hi, there's a lot more information out about this now. I made a post explaining. bsky.app/profile/altc...
I am seeing this - however, from what I've seen (memo, etc.) they aren't reclassifying them as hate symbols in policy, they're just stating they're still absolutely not okay. But I will look into this more for the most updated info.
November 21, 2025 at 5:45 PM
I am seeing this - however, from what I've seen (memo, etc.) they aren't reclassifying them as hate symbols in policy, they're just stating they're still absolutely not okay. But I will look into this more for the most updated info.
(9/9) Since there are a lot of emotions going around about this (rightfully), I wanted to clarify as much as possible based on my knowledge. Anything that anyone has to add, I would appreciate. And please ask any questions if I've been unclear!
November 21, 2025 at 5:42 PM
(9/9) Since there are a lot of emotions going around about this (rightfully), I wanted to clarify as much as possible based on my knowledge. Anything that anyone has to add, I would appreciate. And please ask any questions if I've been unclear!
(8/9) However, it remains to be seen how much of an impact the change in wording/categorization will impact situations where hate symbols are used. There likely will be cases swept under the rug and dismissed because of the lack of central accountability.
November 21, 2025 at 5:42 PM
(8/9) However, it remains to be seen how much of an impact the change in wording/categorization will impact situations where hate symbols are used. There likely will be cases swept under the rug and dismissed because of the lack of central accountability.
(7/9) This does not mean that the CG is now allowing these hate symbols. They've released statements unequivocally condemning their use. This is good - we now have solid statements that can be used to hold leadership accountable.
November 21, 2025 at 5:42 PM
(7/9) This does not mean that the CG is now allowing these hate symbols. They've released statements unequivocally condemning their use. This is good - we now have solid statements that can be used to hold leadership accountable.
(6/9) The issue with command discretion, (and the reason the AHPO was created) is that the CG can still be, in a lot of ways, a Good Ol' Boy's Club. Some commands may crack down on harassment and hate, while others sweep it under the rug. Under the new guidelines, they have more freedom to do so.
November 21, 2025 at 5:41 PM
(6/9) The issue with command discretion, (and the reason the AHPO was created) is that the CG can still be, in a lot of ways, a Good Ol' Boy's Club. Some commands may crack down on harassment and hate, while others sweep it under the rug. Under the new guidelines, they have more freedom to do so.
(5/9) Instead, they will be dealt with on a smaller scale by Command staff locally. This decreases the accountability in place, and leaves it to "command discretion"- an idea that the current administration loves to throw around.
November 21, 2025 at 5:41 PM
(5/9) Instead, they will be dealt with on a smaller scale by Command staff locally. This decreases the accountability in place, and leaves it to "command discretion"- an idea that the current administration loves to throw around.
(4/9) Let me be clear- the Coast Guard HAS changed how they're handling hate symbols. These were previously handled centrally, which allows for more accountability. By changing them from "hate symbols" to "potentially divisive," it appears that they will not be handled by the AHPO.
November 21, 2025 at 5:41 PM
(4/9) Let me be clear- the Coast Guard HAS changed how they're handling hate symbols. These were previously handled centrally, which allows for more accountability. By changing them from "hate symbols" to "potentially divisive," it appears that they will not be handled by the AHPO.
(3/9) This year, the military has been walking back policy around harassment. Part of this process, for the CG, was narrowing the scope of the AHPO to handling only sexual harassment and hate cases. Bullying, hazing, and harassment cases would instead be handled at the smaller Unit/Sector level.
November 21, 2025 at 5:40 PM
(3/9) This year, the military has been walking back policy around harassment. Part of this process, for the CG, was narrowing the scope of the AHPO to handling only sexual harassment and hate cases. Bullying, hazing, and harassment cases would instead be handled at the smaller Unit/Sector level.
(2/9) To be more precise, the CG's 2023 policy defined "hate symbols" and gave very specific examples. Incidents related to hate (as well as all other harassment incidents) were handled by the AHPO (Anti-Harrassment Program Office).
November 21, 2025 at 5:40 PM
(2/9) To be more precise, the CG's 2023 policy defined "hate symbols" and gave very specific examples. Incidents related to hate (as well as all other harassment incidents) were handled by the AHPO (Anti-Harrassment Program Office).
Hello, AltCoast is in fact an official #AltGov account! And yes it's technically true, but more of a push for "command discretion" vs. overtly saying "swastikas are okay". Still seems to be setting the precedent for overlooking things that would previously have been unacceptable.
November 20, 2025 at 11:48 PM
Hello, AltCoast is in fact an official #AltGov account! And yes it's technically true, but more of a push for "command discretion" vs. overtly saying "swastikas are okay". Still seems to be setting the precedent for overlooking things that would previously have been unacceptable.
It's still concerning, even if it is a distraction. Release the Epstein files! But also, let's keep labeling swastikas as hate symbols!
November 20, 2025 at 10:30 PM
It's still concerning, even if it is a distraction. Release the Epstein files! But also, let's keep labeling swastikas as hate symbols!
Not official CG, just AltGov trying to share factual information that the regime may want to keep the actual CG from disseminating! Thanks for the follow!
November 20, 2025 at 10:19 PM
Not official CG, just AltGov trying to share factual information that the regime may want to keep the actual CG from disseminating! Thanks for the follow!
More info: a comparison of the 2023 and 2025 policies removes these examples as "prohibited" and discusses more generally "potentially divisive" symbols. So the WaPo article is factual, but they may still be prohibited by other regs.
I will quote and link the Newsweek article in the comments.
I will quote and link the Newsweek article in the comments.
Big CG is now saying the WaPo report was false and “These symbols have been and remain prohibited in the Coast Guard per policy. Any display, use or promotion of such symbols [...] will be thoroughly investigated & severely punished.”
A reaction to backlash?
www.independent.co.uk/news/world/a...
A reaction to backlash?
www.independent.co.uk/news/world/a...
November 20, 2025 at 10:17 PM