‘Globalize the Mint-ifada’? The struggle for Ben & Jerry’s soul

Ben Cohen has announced that he is trying to gather investors to buy Ben & Jerry’s back from Unilever. After years of tensions between the famous and well-liked ice cream brand and its parent company — which last to this day — Cohen is trying to “free” the maker of well-known products, such as Cherry Garcia, Cookie Dough, and Strawberry Cheesecake. It pains Ben to see what has happened to the company that he and business partner Jerry Greenfield built from scratch by selling ice cream from an abandoned gas station in the late 1970s.

The company’s social mission has always been important to Ben, it was a way to distinguish themselves from other companies. Ben & Jerry’s is not simply about profit-making, it wants to be on the forefront of the fight for social justice. A company that espouses progressive values and, therefore, decided to wade into international politics in 2021, by announcing that it no longer wished to have its products sold in the West Bank. It led to conflict with Unilever and legal battles that have continued since then. Now, Ben Cohen wants to try to buy back the company, so it can once again return to pursuing its social mission without restrictions. As Ben said, Ben and Jerry’s is a “company with a soul.” This deserves some scrutiny.

Ice cream on a mission

When visiting Ben & Jerry’s website, you will find useful information about the company’s values, how they do business, and where they do business. In terms of values, the company supports the reduction of economic inequality, minimizing waste as a result of their production methods, and nonviolent ways to foster peace and justice. In the last case, it mentions its stance on the production of weapons systems, arguing that government resources could be better used elsewhere.

Another page is devoted to the issues the ice cream maker cares about and it lists topics such as racial justice, climate impact, LGBTQ+ rights, fair trade, and democracy, to name a few. Important topics, absolutely, and they make Ben & Jerry’s stand out compared to its competitors. On more than one occasion, it has ventured into the realm of social and political issues in the United States, making its voice usually heard by introducing catchy and clever names for new products with a clear social statement. In this sense, it has continued with the social activism its founders consider important. And while the website states that it has progressive values, it also claims to be nonpartisan. I guess that means that it is open to cooperate with all political actors that align with its mission, though I think it is safe to say that said progressive values means that the brand would prefer to work with those of a left-wing persuasion. A soul that still makes Ben Cohen proud. Yet, now he believes that this soul is in danger. But what kind of soul is it?

Israel and the West Bank

We all know how the controversy started between Unilever and one of its most popular ice cream brands: selling products in the West Bank. In 2021, Ben & Jerry’s stated that it no longer wished its ice cream to be sold in settlements across the Green Line, referring to the fact that they were considered illegal under international law. When asked if it would not be better to completely halt sales in Israel, because of this particular government policy, Cohen and Greenfield pushed back. They stated that they had no issue with Israel’s existence and that they supported the two-state solution, which is why they wanted their products to be sold behind the Green Line only. They vehemently denied being antisemitic, with Cohen even calling it absurd, referring to his own Jewish background.

The announcement led to quite a lot of outrage and I remember Israelis demonstratively dumping their pints in the garbage in protest – I thought that was funny. The accusation about antisemitism was, I believe, exaggerated, as Cohen and Greenfield clearly stated that they were not anti-Israel. Moreover, we cannot deny that certain events take place in the West Bank that deserve our attention as well as condemnation and they have only increased over the years. Even now, the brazen acts of violent settlers continue unabated. However, the issue with the West Bank seems odd for an ice cream maker to be so invested in.

Selective social justice

After the announcement and the consequential controversy it created, including accusations of antisemitism, Unilever started to distance itself from Ben and Jerry’s. As of now, according to the brand’s website, it has sold the trademark rights to a company in Israel, Blue & White Ice-Cream Ltd., which, in turn, is allowed to use Hebrew and Arabic language versions of Ben & Jerry’s name. In addition, it states that it has no ownership rights or economic interest in said company.

First of all, Ben & Jerry’s wants to advance its social mission by taking a stand on settlements in the West Bank. The way to do this is to stop its products from being sold in these settlements. However, in practice, that barely achieves anything. For instance, if I lived in Beitar Illit, a settlement right across the Green Line, and have a craving for Cookie Dough, I can simply hop across the Green Line, buy it in any store, and hop back across the Line and enjoy a pint, probably within 30-45 minutes, if I traveled by car. This alone shows that Cohen supported this restriction in 2021 for reasons to make himself feel better about the social credentials of the company he helped found.

Secondly, in 2021 the interviewer asked if Cohen and Greenfield would support stopping the sale of the brand’s products in Georgia and Texas, considering that these states adopted policies that did not align with Ben & Jerry’s social mission. Cohen and Greenfield apparently went silent for a few seconds and then answered that it was something they needed to think about (Note: Their products are still sold throughout all of the US).

Thirdly, I believe that a company can decide that it does not wish to sell products somewhere, even if it is ludicrous from a practical standpoint. Simultaneously, Israeli consumers can choose to express their discontent by no longer purchasing the ice cream maker’s products, why not? But Ben & Jerry’s is owned by Unilever and it disagreed with the decision of its own subsidiary. Eventually, it decided to solve this thorny issue by selling the trademark rights to Blue & White Ice-Cream Ltd. Not a bad solution, right? But Ben & Jerry’s simply could not let it go. They proceeded to sue Unilever for selling its business to its Israeli licensee. This lawsuit was settled in 2022 and Unilever was required to make donations worth millions of dollars to human rights groups of Ben & Jerry’s choosing: Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) and a chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).

JVP supports the dismantling of Israel and its replacement by a different arrangement – whatever that may be – and a year later, in November 2023, the director of the LA chapter of CAIR stated that Israel should be attacked and did not have the right to defend itself. So, Israelis should be slaughtered and simply accept it. CAIR’s anti-Israel stance is well-known and has been for years. Yet Ben & Jerry’s decided to select these groups for donations? It seems Cohen’s argument that the ice cream maker is not anti-Israel is spurious, to say the least. Maybe Cohen and Greenfield personally do not endorse the dismantling of Israel, but the groups their brand financially supports certainly do.

And last year, Ben & Jerry’s sued Unilever, because it argued that it was not allowed to call for a ceasefire in Gaza, support the safe departure of Palestinian refugees to Britain, back students protesting against deaths in Gaza, and advocate for a halt in US military aid to Israel. In its call for a ceasefire, the ice cream maker did not call for Hamas to release all the hostages nor did it condemn October 7^th. It seems Ben & Jerry’s has decidedly adopted an anti-Israel stance, since Cohen and Greenfield’s statements in 2021.

But, apart from that, what are Ben & Jerry’s positions on other countries and international issues?

The limits of progressive values

On the company’s website, you will find the countries where Ben & Jerry’s does business proudly displayed. But one country stands out: Hungary. This Central European country is ruled by Viktor Orbán who, at the very least in progressive circles, is called a far-right autocrat by many. Indeed, Orbán coined the term “illiberal democracy.” Nevertheless, Ben & Jerry’s continues to do business there. Moreover, the list of countries mentioned on the website refers to branches it operates. It does not mean that its products are sold exclusively in these countries. Of course, Ben & Jerry’s products can be exported to countries where no branch of the company exists. And this happens. In Saudi Arabia and China, you can buy Ben & Jerry’s products. I believe that Ben Cohen’s progressive values would or, at least should, make him uncomfortable that his brand is sold in these particular countries.

On a personal level, Ben Cohen’s political views become instantly apparent and show why this support for universal human rights is actually based on a selective far-left agenda. One look at Ukraine shows how Cohen’s conviction that the US is to blame for nearly everything guides his position. In February 2022, shortly before Putin invaded Ukraine, Ben & Jerry’s showcased its flawed peace advocacy by posting a plea on social media. Did they beg Putin to forgo his threats against Ukraine? No, they called on President Biden to de-escalate tensions. Biden’s decision to send a few thousand troops to American allies sharing a border with Russia was equal to a military buildup of 100,000 Russian troops around Ukraine. Forget about Putin’s annexation of Crimea or his hybrid war in eastern Ukraine which happened prior to these developments. No, if Putin invaded Ukraine, it had to be the United States’ fault. How gullible one can be. Cohen is of the same opinion. A child of the ’60s, he believes that everything is connected to American imperialism.

So when Putin invaded Ukraine, Cohen proceeded to blame the US and NATO for provoking him. His critique of NATO’s enlargement completely ignores the agency of the countries who voluntarily joined this treaty organization. Why would they want to join? Because countries such as Poland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have a troubled history with their much larger eastern neighbor, whether it was tsarist Russia or the Soviet Union. But this does not matter to Cohen. His opinions were formed during his youth and everything since then has been based on that enduring worldview. Ukraine is supported by the US, so Russia has to be right. It is why Cohen takes a pacifist stance and despite Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, still takes a neutral position. He does not support Ukraine or Russia, but advocates for negotiations. Ironically, his position is rather similar to President Donald Trump’s, a man he dislikes vehemently — funny how two opposites can think alike on some issues.

What about health?

Finally, it needs to said. Regardless of Ben & Jerry’s lofty social mission it still, at the end of the day, sells…ice cream. Corporate social responsibility is important, but you run a business, first and foremost. I would expect that you take care of your employees, strive to make a profit, and try to contribute to the communities you are a part of, as best you can. But when Ben & Jerry’s puts the focus on its social mission, you get the feeling that this is a marketing ploy, too. By advocating for social causes, whether in the US or across the globe about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, you might forget about what kind of product they make. Do not get me wrong, I love ice cream, though not Ben & Jerry’s, particularly. A few years ago, its CEO Matthew McCarthy was fairly blunt when talking about the company’s launch of vegan options. He said that they were not making health food, period.

The company was focused on championing social justice and progressive values, but consumers’ health does not factor into that. Above all, the company sells premium – meaning expensive – and indulgent – meaning high in sugar and fat – ice cream. Nothing wrong with that, but if their website does promote its own social agenda by taking pot shots at others for venturing into space – and we know who they mean – it is comical, to say the least. For instance, a vegan version of Chunky Monkey contains four types of sugar. And most adults should ingest roughly 2,000 calories per day, yet a “small” ice cream in one of its scoop shops can contain up to a quarter of that daily intake. And several of its popular brands contain 12 grams of saturated fat, which is 60 percent of the daily limit and 9 teaspoons of added sugar, roughly 76 percent of the daily limit. The vegan options are similar. All in one serving.

A far-left dessert, which you should not eat too much

So, while Ben & Jerry’s can boast about its social agenda, it is quite clear that this social mission aligns with certain far-left views. Ben Cohen might want to buy back his ice cream company to save its soul, but considering what he sells and the selective way of championing issues, I would argue that this ship has sailed a long time ago. Nonetheless, I can imagine Ben & Jerry’s one day introducing a new mint chip flavor: Globalize the Mint-ifada, complete with lots of sugar and fat.

But hey, at least they care about the planet.