If hate comes to us as art we're supposed to simply appreciate the artistry and look past the hate. Or put the hate "in context" and still appreciate the artistry. So Obama's approval of manifest destiny and it's resultant genocide is artistic propaganda to savor, not to condemn as hate speech. Mather's gay bashing is also to be put into context and seen as the authentic artistry of an angry young man rather than hate speech. Or we can label it ironic and appreciate it from that perspective. The framing is far more important than the actual hate. If someone else who is not an artist says the same thing without labeling it art then we can condemn it as hate speech. It's very confusing to many red, black, and brown people as well as to many queers, women, and other minorities why this is so but white hetero males tell us this is so and failure to see the world through their lens is simply a sign of ignorance on the part of these dissenting minorities. Since some minorities agree with them it is obviously the correct point of view and those who disagree are either too provincial, ignorant, crass, or simplistically reductionist to really understand.
John Thornton