A Slideshow of Downloadable & Shareable Graphs for Stakeholder Use
Note: All graphs were created in Tableau. Please see our data biography to learn how data was collected and processed and please read our general report to learn more about the phenomena identified in these visualizations.
According to the Swastika Counter Project dataset, swastikas most often surfaced in K-12 and higher education settings between January 2016 and 2021. In over 200 cases, swastikas surfaced on private property such as homes and cars, and in over 60 cases, swastikas appeared on the exterior surface of Jewish and other religious institutions.
The rate of swastika incidents between January 2016 and January 2021 fluctuated, with peaks occurring around the 2016 presidential election, Trump’s inauguration in early 2017. The rate of swastika incidents also escalated around the 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, VA and around Jewish high holidays.
The most common group targeted by swastikas between January 2016 and January 2021 was the Jewish community, according to analysis of the Swastika Counter Project data set. The Black American Community was also commonly targeted–in over 20% of cases in which the targeted community could be identified. In nearly 5% of identifiable cases, swastikas targeted the LGBTQ+ community.
Words, phrases, and other signs commonly circulated alongside swastikas, according to the sources in the Swastika Counter Project dataset. While “Trump” was the most common word that showed up alongside swastikas, racist and antisemitic slurs as well as appeals to white nationalism such as “White Power” were also frequent.
Frames are used by reported sources to identify the appearances of swastikas. Frames influence how readers interpret swastika incidents. While the word “swastika” was most commonly used, “vandalism” and “graffiti” were often commonly used. See our Community Response Report for reasons why such framing can be problematic.
Different reporting sources used different frames to identify swastika incidents. In the national news, swastika incidents were most often identified as “graffiti” while in student publications, the frame”vandalism” was used most frequently.
The culprit, as well as the race of culprits, went largely unreported by sources in the Swastika Counter Project data set. However, in the 91 cases in which the culprit’s race was identified, the culprit was reported as white in 75 cases.
The name of the culprit and gender of the culprit went largely unreported by sources in the Swastika Counter Project dataset. However, in the 161 cases in which the gender of the culprit was identified, it was identified as “male.”
The culprit of swastika incidents went largely unreported, as was much identifying information of culprits. However, in 28 of the 47 cases in which the association or affiliation was identifiable, the culprit was identified as a student, perhaps not surprising since schools were the most frequently targeted sites in the Swastika Counter Project data set.