There are intellectually coherent critics of the finance business on both the left and the right (and in the business itself), and there are raving conspiracy-theorist banker-haters on both the left and the right.   Go find a Chicago-schooler and a Trotskyite if you need some counter-examples to the more common stereotypes.

As a Libertarian I’m not really on either side of the aisle, and while I’ve generally found clueless lefties to be nicer people than clueless righties, and the right wing tends to be more tolerant of hatred, the left has its fair share as well, and you really need to keep it under control, which is tough in a relatively leaderless movement where the core values are frustration and anger, and where joining the movement is defined by showing up at a rally, optionally with a sign or pizza.  

Back when I was doing anti-tax protest stuff in the early 90s, we’d have some really scary people come up to us on the street;  I was much less bothered by the people who said we were wrong about everything but taxes and dumping the  governor than by some of the ones who said they liked us and thought we agreed on everything except for a couple of issues (typically immigration and war and drugs and free speech, etc.)  (Ick!  At least the KKK were illiterate, unlike some of the banker-hating foreigner-hating anti-Semites who could not only write but could afford to pay for typesetting so it took longer to notice they’d left you their literature.  And then there were the LaRouchies, who were still waffling about whether to be left-wing or right-wing crazies back then, but either way it was the Rockefellers’ fault and the Queen of England was somehow involved.)

So I’m not saying that ows’ers, or Octopi Wall Street or whoever are anti-semitic. I’m just taking issue with your claim that anyone who expresses even a concern about the use of this symbol in these comments is nothing more than a troll. Why you despise folks what think reasonable disagreement = OK?

You are attempting to use this very well-read blog to create an association of anti-Semitism with OWS in the minds of the readers.

and

It’s fairly clever concern trolling — but that it what it is. Designed to damage the interests of those whom you purport to be interested in “helping”.

That’s right next door to calling me a provocateur, and I don’t care for it one goddamned bit.

Now, on reflection, while I still don’t care for the conspiracist implications of octopus imagery (though “Octopi Wall Street” is an incredibly clever slogan), I don’t think it’s generally anti-Semitic. This particular example, however, both comes from an anti-Semitic book and has those horns on it. That doesn’t carry the message of anti-Semitism to most viewers today, especially since the “Jews have horns” trope has lost its legs, but it did in its original time and context, and, given that, would make for a credible yet false accusation against those who use it innocently, just as I will not be able to admire the “Cross of Gold” speech uncritically anymore after reading your observation above, yet wonder whether Bryan had either or both of those implications in mind.

Anyone who knows me knows that I am completely thrilled by the development of the Occupy Wall Street movement. I hope that it has enough time and space for those in it to figure out what they want. So far it seems to be united around a desire for a better world and righteous anger at the current state of things. That’s a wonderful start, and I want to see it go forward.

The right wing is already making the claim of anti-Semitism against the movement, and I care deeply–possibly too deeply–about not letting that claim make any headway. I also know the twined history of anti-banker sentiment and anti-Semitism, and I don’t believe it’s entirely a dead idea on the right. Sometimes they project their inner feelings onto their enemies.

Oh, and speaking of concern trolling: Wouldn’t you say the “Warning to American Jews” in the screed from which that cartoon is taken is a fine pre-internet example?

Not that I think you’re a Republican, or opposed to the OWS movement. But there’s also no reason to think that Frank W was talking about you in particular, above. 

That said, the animal symbol I think of when I consider antisemitic cartoons is the rat, not the octopus. I don’t recall ever seeing any octopus cartoons when they taught us about the Holocaust back in Hebrew school. I’m not really inclined to take claims of the inherent antisemitism of octopus cartoons seriously without much better evidence than has been so far presented. (That’s aside from the argument that this particular individual cartoon is antisemitic because of the text that accompanies it in its original source.) 

It wasn’t all that long ago that the neo-conservative backers of the War on Some Terrorism were hiding behind accusations that mere mention of the word “neo-conservative” was a coded antisemitic reference. Knowing how fond the right is of agents provocateurs and other false-flag operations, as well as their general tendency towards psychological projection, I’m sure we’ll all hear lots more about how the OWS movement is full of Jew-haters, even if those Jew-haters have to be hired for the purpose. 

http://sl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slika:Standard_oil_octopus_loc_color.jpg

English imperialism as an octopus:

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:English_imperialism_octopus.jpg

Railroad barons/San Francisco elite, New York officials, standard oil/new york officials/trusts, New York Mayor, all as octopus cartoons:

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:wKS9xovG0GIJ:nationalhumanitiescenter.org/pds/gilded/power/text1/octopusimages.pdf+monopoly+cartoon+octopus&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESjo7BfCNqrHOKk4wXmhCt7PTiysqOqFl1Y5KuzRvI4QbLVs49wGnyFJfhoRr4kqSfegOxpj2z7wc3vu0EspPZz8L7yRXGVRbIx-Q2j8KwsDGthen2Yd7JcMnuhCeqkuCtKBobbV&sig=AHIEtbSr57A5XZAiibduBURX7Qd76wIo1Q&pli=1

To Mega Therion!

However, I do think we’re losing something when we give up this image. We’re losing the history of all those other American anti-monopoly ideas. If the issue is seen as something unique to today, then it’s one side’s word against another’s – but if the issue is related in our minds to robber barons, and Teddy’s trust-busting, and Taibbi’s invective against those who caused the 2008 crisis, then there’s a continuity there which lends something to the side of the protesters.

You are attempting to use this very well-read blog to create an association of anti-Semitism with OWS in the minds of the readers.

No, I am encouraging people to defang two parallel efforts of different right-wing tendencies:

1) To discredit the Occupy Wall Street movement by associating it with anti-Semitism
2) To infuse the Occupy Wall Street movement with Ron Paul-style nutcase conspiratism

You are also trying to establish an association between “banker’s conspiracy” and Jews in the minds of the readers. The 2 concept are not coincident — except in your efforts here.

That is also a false statement. See paragraph three of this section.

I’ve been using this pseudonym consistently for quite a while. Anyone who believes your bullshit about what I am trying to do is invited to search my history and decide for themselves. If they are generously inclined toward you, they will call you something other than a liar.

You are attempting to use this very well-read blog to create an association of anti-Semitism with OWS in the minds of the readers. By coming back again and again with your unsubstantiated assertions regard this image, and by carefully avoiding discussion of  its documented (Mother Jones, 10/06/2011) use in 19th century U.S. culture — where it was free from anti-Semitic taint. And where it was used to lampoon very real monopolist conspiracies that impoverished large numbers of people.

You are also trying to establish an association between “banker’s conspiracy” and Jews in the minds of the readers. The 2 concept are not coincident — except in your efforts here.

It’s fairly clever concern trolling — but that it what it is. Designed to damage the interests of those whom you purport to be interested in “helping”.

You sound smart enough to know that the Nazi’s appropriated the Swastika and it’s meaning is actually not evil. Every culture that’s had a written language and many that have not, has created a Swastika and it almost universally means Life, Luck and generally positive things.  

Read the Wiki:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swastika#Historical_use_in_the_East

And be sure to check out ManWoman, the artist who’s making it his life mission to reclaim the swastika. (someone I figure would have been featured on BoingBoing already actually.): http://manwoman.net/

In any case, I’m not entirely sure that the octopus as symbol is as entirely repulsive as some here think that it should be. I can see that angle but in the same vein it will continue to be a symbol of revulsion if we only allow it to be used by people with undesirable ideologies and motives. Symbols are symbols and they represent other things. It is up to us as to what those symbols mean. Don’t let the racist fuck-bags ruin yet another symbol by just giving up.

On a side note, yeah the swastika is well and truly screwed for at least the next 500 years or so, and as such is probably the worst straw-man available to this argument, especially considering it’s very recent and very prominent association with the brand of anti-Semitic fascism.

I had not seen it used in that fashion before – or maybe I just didn’t recognise the connection other than as a means to diminish another group or express concerns about the reach or influence of some group or other.

I think this says it all:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octopus#Etymology_and_pluralization

I’m with Fowler and the OED on this one.  To continue using Octopi is merely to be rigid, inaccurate and to continue a more incorrect usage of Latin where it doesn’t belong.

:)