There is a battle under way over the ownership and identity of the iconic ice cream brand Ben and Jerry’s — and its radical leftist founders, Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, appear to be losing badly.
Earlier this month, the Wall Street Journal indicated that Cohen was trying to gather investors to buy back the brand that he and Greenfield sold to Unilever 25 years ago.
This buyback initiative came just weeks after Unilever removed the company’s anti-Trump CEO Dave Stever, allegedly on account of his commitment to Ben and Jerry’s leftist activism and despite a letter of support from Cohen and Greenfield; after years of clashes over how the ice cream company communicates its politics; and amid Unilever’s preparations to spin off its ice cream assets.
“In the year 2000, Unilever loved us for who we were,” Cohen told the Journal. “Now we’ve gone separate ways in our relationship. We just need them to set us free.”
Unilever crushed Cohen’s dream this week, indicating that Ben and Jerry’s is “not for sale,” reported Bloomberg.
“The separation and listing of ice cream is the option that we consider maximizes shareholder value; that has not changed,” Unilever CEO Fernando Fernandez said on a media call.
As of July 1, Unilever ice cream will reportedly become the Magnum Ice Cream Company and be listed in the Netherlands as a separate entity.
After tolerating decades of radioactive politics, Unilever appears keen to decontaminate Ben and Jerry’s.
‘Many states found Unilever to be in violation of their anti-boycott, divestment, and sanctions laws.’
The ice cream company has long appeared less focused on selling its sugary dessert and more focused on selling a woke political worldview. For instance, under its previous radical leadership, the company:
told Americans celebrating the Fourth of July that “it’s high time we recognize that the US exists on stolen Indigenous land and commit to returning it”;
called for the defunding of police;
opposed legislation banning men from women’s sports, preventing teachers from grooming students behind parents’ backs, keeping boys out of girls’ locker rooms, and protecting children from drag shows;
issued misleading commentary about Kyle Rittenhouse;
bemoaned the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision and advocated for looser abortion laws;
took hard anti-Israel stances;
rolled out “Pecan Resist” in 2018 — a flavor that the company said “supports groups creating a more just and equitable nation for us all, and who are fighting President Trump’s regressive agenda”; and
promoted Democratic candidates in concert with the leftist organizing outfit MoveOn Civic Action.
Ben and Jerry’s still appears to be a sugary leftist front, complaining about “white people occupy[ing] a disproportionate number of positions of power in our society,” championing non-straight activism, pushing climate alarmism, creating a coconut-flavored Kamala Harris ice cream, and pouring boatloads of money into radical causes. However, Unilever has apparently begun to suffer the effects of the ice cream company’s activism.
Unilever noted in a March legal filing that as a result of the 2021 decision by Ben and Jerry’s to halt sales of its ice cream in Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, “many states found Unilever to be in violation of their anti-boycott, divestment, and sanctions laws leading to multiple lawsuits in the United States and Israel, accusations of antisemitism, severe sanctions, and the divestment of hundreds of millions of dollars in Unilever’s stock.”
Unilever subsequently sold the company’s ice cream business in Israel to its Israeli distributor, ensuring continued sales throughout the Jewish state.
‘Business is the most powerful force in our society.’
The Journal noted that this resulted in a lawsuit as well as Unilever’s assertion that after two decades of supporting the brand’s activism, the advocacy by Ben and Jerry’s for “one-sided, highly controversial, and polarizing topics” put it, the ice cream company, and their employees at risk.
Two years after the first lawsuit, Ben and Jerry’s sued Unilever again in November, alleging its parent company tried to suppress the ice cream company’s efforts to publicly support Palestinians and criticize Israel’s war on Hamas terrorists.
“Ben & Jerry’s is a company with a soul,” Cohen told the Journal. “Business is the most powerful force in our society, and for that, it has responsibility to the society.”
With the legal battle still ongoing, Unilever — perhaps recognizing that businesses actually just have a responsibility to their shareholders — recently threatened to pull funding from the Ben and Jerry’s Foundation, reported Reuters.
Sources said to be familiar with the matter told Reuters that Unilever has conditioned continued funding — roughly $5 million a year — on the foundation agreeing to an expedited audit of its donations.
The foundation said in a statement Tuesday, “Unilever has funded the work of the foundation as a social justice organization throughout the years since the merger without any issues being raised. We are hopeful we will have the same cooperative relationship with the Magnum Ice Cream Company, the new spin-off company for Unilever’s ice cream business.”
The foundation added, “We have reached out to Unilever for clarification of news reports about the Foundation’s ongoing financial support.”
Fernandez said of the proposed foundation audit, “We have not made any threat,” reported Bloomberg.
“It is our responsibility to ensure that these funds are used properly,” said the Unilever CEO. “It has to be allocated to areas or institutions that are absolutely in line with the ones that are part of the acquisition agreement.”
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
Business, Unilever, Icecream, Ice cream, Magnum ice cream company, Ben & jerry’s, Ben and jerrys, Ben cohen, Jerry greenfield, Politics
