In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set || First feminist blog on the internet

Monkeys are stealing your money

Jill

It’s no secret that the Republican party has depended on racism to secure votes, from the Southern Strategy to Welfare Queens to the border fence. So this latest ad (the first ad listed, “Lawyers seek ‘victims’ for class action lawsuits”) from a right-wing legal organization, which ran on the New York Times Op/Ed page on Monday, shouldn’t surprise me. And yet, I’m still shocked at the blatant racism.

Racist monkey ad

Yes, those are chimpanzees lined up next to two upstanding white guys.

The ad is from an organization that supports tort reform laws. The point, as far as I can tell, is to emphasize that the lazy undeserving poor are lining up to steal from good, upstanding corporations by suing them into oblivion. The lazy, undeserving poor are, naturally, monkeys.

As I wrote above, this isn’t anything new. But that doesn’t make it any less disgusting.

27 thoughts on Monkeys are stealing your money

  1. You’re surprised, why? Stuff like this only seems new to people who haven’t been looking or have chosen to remain willfully blind

  2. Leaving aside the fun racism for a moment, this bit is especially entertaining to me:

    Even the most unerring companies fold under proven intimidation tactics and fork over cash. When they see the negative media campaigns launched against other businesses and how their reputations have been smeared, they can’t settle fast enought.

    So we’re supposed to believe that these poor put-upon businesses are so swamped by negative media that they can’t even bear to put up a decent legal fight? Riiiiiight.

  4. You’d never guess from listening to these “tort reform” advocates that the vast majority of civil litigation stems from businesses suing each other.

    As for the picture, thanks for putting it in context. I would have thought it was a group photo of candidates for the next Supreme Court opening.

  5. You’d never guess from listening to these “tort reform” advocates that the vast majority of civil litigation stems from businesses suing each other.

    As for the picture, thanks for putting it in context. I would have thought it was a group photo of candidates for the next Supreme Court opening.

  7. Oh wait.

    Freepers = Flying monkeys.

    My bad.

    These would be aggrieved MRAs and 10 Commandments-in-every-public-place litigators.

    Wow, I really need to cut down on the caffiene.

  8. It’s very hard to tell from this ad just what type of class-action suit they’re whining about (mass torts? civil rights? shareholder derivative suits? overcharges on CDs?). But of course, it’s not quite so easy as they make it out to be to get a payout, and in big consumer actions, all you’re likely to get is a coupon or some nominal cash award. In any event, you still have to belong to the class, and the person driving the bus (i.e., the lead plaintiff) has to do some work. As do the attorneys, though once the class is certified, it’s largely a matter of identifying the class and notifying the members.

    About the only thing I’ve ever seen where clients were drummed up was in asbestos litigation, where a not insubstantial number of plaintiffs were encouraged to file suit even though they weren’t sick yet. That wound up screwing the clients in the end — not to mention, it resulted in a lot of wasted time and probably resulted in a number of people being unable to sue when they did get sick. But asbestos litigation is a beast unlike any other, since it’s been running like a factory since the 1970s.

  10. Usually I’m one to jump on images of racism and class-ism, but I’m not so sure I see blatant racism here. I can see what you’re going for, but I don’t think that the ad really says anything that would indicate it’s pointing at non-white people. Could you elaborate further?

  12. Damn, Vanessa beat me to it.

    This ad is not only racist, it’s not even getting the racism right. Chimpanzees are apes, not monkeys.

    Although apparently little things like “facts” don’t seem to bother the makers of this ad much. As Bitter Scribe pointed out.

  13. I think the two men are supposed to be attorneys. You know, like in those ads where the lawyers pose with their clients?

  14. How exactly is this ‘racist’? It’s you goode PC lefty folks who are making the negro-monkey connection, not the ad.

    Also, regarding racism and ’empowerment’ of ‘minorities’ in general: be careful what you wish for. You might just get South Africa — or worse.

    Oh and class action lawsuits most definitely are BS, as is the corrupt and overlawyered US legal system as a whole. Hypocritical dimwits who, with the help of amoral and opportunistic lawyers, try to extort ridiculous amounts of cash from tobacco companies or gun manufacturers (or McDonald’s or whatever) deserve a big fat kick in the groin rather than a big fat ‘settlement’. Fucking worthless parasites. May they eat shit & die.

  15. Um.. aren’t you the one making the connection between the “monkeys” in this ad and non-whites? Anyway, if you look closely you can see alot of white skin on the the bodies of these people.

  16. Pingback: Feministe » From the special moderation queue
  19. Pingback: Pandagon :: Do they even let your kind into the courtroom? :: September :: 2007

  20. I was under the impression that being part of a class action lawsuit was not generally the path to easy riches, as the damn things take forever and your share ends up being maybe $50.

  21. aaannndddd once again we learn that by pointing out racism, someone will imply that you are a racist.

    (Although in this case I agree with #17, in that if the ad was deliberately racist code, the apes would have been darker. Which makes the ad-writers more stupid than racist, so, way to go, guys!)

  22. I’m sorry, but this attempt to find racism in this ad is ridiculous. I am Black, and have been so all of my life, so I think that I have the all the tools and experience necessary to recognize subtle racism and, truly, its not here.
    The cartoons of Condi Rice all aped out that have been published around the world and Japanese manufacturers selling products depicting apes engaged in hip hop activities are examples of racism, this ad is not. Why is it that you assume that the only participants in class actions are Black? I’ve heard of gorillas and monkeys being compared to Blacks, but not chimps. What led YOU to make that connection?

    You do a great disservice to the cause of racial equality by crying “wolf” where there is clearly no wolf in sight. Please stop this crap if you’re really seeking to make a positive contribution on this topic.
    Some self reflection as to why you are using Black people’s issues as an excuse to vent your seeming frustration with the “man” (ie the NY Times and big corporations) and fuel your fight with the “establishment” might be in order. Are you really trying to help us or just exploit our plight for your selfish political advantage?

  23. The racism is evident to those used to ferreting out dog whistle politics. Amanda spells it out for you:

    …proponents like to draw attention to the fact that black people have as much right as white people to sue in order to get white working class people to turn against the right to sue for damages if you’ve been damaged.

    Why didn’t the ad’s authors use a metaphor more appropriate to their surface idea, like sheep? No, they wanted to make a point with the people who would otherwise be indifferent or repudiative of their message: working and middle class white conservatives.

    Eritis’s comment, if not parody, is very instructive. He/She offers a sensationalist screed about South Africa (from a website run by a notorious white supremacist and nativist polician in the UK) as ‘evidence’ that the niggers will ruin everything if you take off their chains (therefore it’s probably best to limit their access to courts, even though that’s not what the add is saying, nudge & wink). He/She conveniently discounts the horrid history of apartheid, of course.

    And Alessandra, I hope you’re kidding:

    I’ve heard of gorillas and monkeys being compared to Blacks, but not chimps. What led YOU to make that connection?

    And of all the examples you could have chosen, you picked Condi freaking Rice? C’mon, ‘sister.’

    You put words into Jill’s mouth, too. Nowhere did she even suggest that “the only participants in class actions are Black.” That is the barely coded message thrown into the ad for the benefit of the racist constituency. And speaking as a “Black” man: short of getting gunned down in the street by a trigger-happy right-wing cop, the only racially-oriented plight I might conceivably face would best be mitigated with the help of a good trial lawyer.

  24. Five bucks says their original tagline was “Don’t let them make a monkey out of you” or something similar. I’m not sure whether I’d consider this to be explicitly racist, but it’s definitely worth analysing with a racial lens.

  25. Those white guys aren’t “upstanding.” They’re class action plaintiff attorneys, who are (in the eyes of the ad’s author) even slimier than the plaintiffs themselves. They’re certainly richer. Just FYI.

    But I don’t think most people associate class action suits with black people…? Which confuses me on the racism thing.

    I mean, I guess I’m “seeing the racism” if that means “understanding that some people here think it’s racist because there are monkeys in it.” But not all monkey images are racist, right? Doesn’t it need to be “monkeys plus” with some other reference (to immigrants, or non-english speakers, or inner cities, etc)? Or are monkeys like blackface? “poor” isn’t “nonwhite” by any means.

  26. First of all church secretary, you’re not my “sister”. Save your pandering racist patronizing and condesension for those Black people who need your approval and seek your validation.

    I did not put words in anyone’s mouth, that the blogger believes that Black people are the primary participants in class actions is implicit in HER assumption that the ad was racist and depicted “lazy Black people”.

    Do you have any idea how ridiculous you appear when suggesting that Condi Rice can not be depicted in a racist way simply because she is a Republican? Isn’t that something? A white woman dismissing the racism directed against a Black woman as irrelvant because the Black woman is not a compliant nigra and has the audacity to make her own decisons. How very KKK of you.

    If all the uproar in this Blog over this NYT ad was genuine, there would be outrage over the treatment on ANY person that is racist in nature, irrespective of their political opinion. The fact that you show no compassion for Condi Rice following the very public racist attacks on her just proves my earlier point that this fake “outrage” over the alleged example of “racism” in the NYT was not due to any real concern about racism, but simply an opportunity to exploit Black people for your own political advantage. It also lends support for the oft heard allegation that some of the most racist people in this country are the ones who proclaim most loudly how “liberal” they are.

    Shameful.

  27. A white woman dismissing the racism directed against a Black woman as irrelvant because the Black woman is not a compliant nigra and has the audacity to make her own decisons. How very KKK of you.

    Actually, I believe, as Church Secretary stated in his comment, that he is a Black man, not white woman.

Comments are currently closed.