Erastus Corning II, the infamous Democratic Mayor of Albany in September 1981 had this to say about the racist Springbook's team playing in Washington Avenue Arseonal:

I don't think anybody in his right mind thinks I want them here. No, I don't want them here. But they have a right to play here.

25 years later, the events over at the University of Massachusetts's Amherst Campus are of great concern. Several months ago, several students where suspended for posing in a series of photographs depicting Klansman suits and hats with neo-nazi symbols. Many have said it was just a spoof and not a representative of these individuals' beliefs and therefore should not be considered serious political communication. They may have been communicating a subtle message on our political relation to hate-groups.

Why should we care about these hate groups? Their ideas are disagreeable to many of us, but they are worth our consideration. Particularly in academia and with politics, all ideas must be available for consideration and debate in a reasonable fashion. Indeed, hate group ideas might give us a useful perspective in a world dominated by multiculturalism. The de facto standing of African Americans as a group seems to confirm one principle of hate groups: they are inferior. Income for an African American is typically much lower then his Caucasian counterpart. There is a lot more to this issue then actual biological inferiority, but it's a point missed without looking at both multiculturalism and racism.

Neo-nazis often violate common tolerance principles. The common liberal question is: how can we tolerate nazis when they fail to tolerate others? That is difficult to answer, except to argue that their choice of tolerance is a matter of political prerogative. As long as their actions are not physically or practically limiting the other civil liberties or substantivally destroying their environment, there is no reason that can't co-exist. A liberal can tolerate the views of hate-groups while disagreeing their content. It is fine to choose an alternative lifestyle or belief system as long as it doesn't interfere substantivally with other choices.

When Neo-Nazis and other hate groups are engaged in positive political debate there is a great possibility to move forward. Both racists and multiculturalists see African Americans and other minority groups as being in an inferior position, and suggest that things be done to rectify it. African Americans are inferior in many ways as demonstrated by the criminal justice system, poverty, and lifestyle choices if you think the white lifestyle is better. Such commonalty suggests that we should be advocating for positive social change, such as laws give de jure and de facto fairness, and realize how certain solutions are not effective today. If hate groups say blacks are inferior, then let's make them superior or at least equal.

To advocate for the neo-nazis' speech rights and invite them towards a meaningful political debate does not mean we have to support or condone them in anyway. There is in implicit condone when you allow them to speak, but that right does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously or have their words accepted. Symbols of racism can be powerful but nowadays they are less powerful then those who accept many different races. Allow them fairness in discussion and debate and we can become a more enlightened society.