The founders of Ben & Jerry are trying to reclaim their brand after parent company Unilever allegedly banned criticism of President Donald Trump towards his return to the White House.
Co-founder Ben Cohen is currently open to buy Ben & Jerry’s back as Unilever prepares to spin off the entire ice cream division. The plea followed years of internal conflict over the brand’s progressive messaging and led to a recently revealed claim that Unilever blocked the company from publishing anti-Trump political statements during its recent inauguration. (Related: Ben & Jerry’s parent company loses an estimated $2.5 billion after tweeting about “stolen indigenous land” on July 4th.)
“Despite 40 years of progressive social work and years of challenging policies in both Democrats and Republican presidents, Trump is now too taboo for a brand synonymous with “peace, love, ice cream,” wrote Ben & Jerry’s lawyers. Court filing For Unilever.
Today we launched Pecan Resid! This flavor supports a group that creates a fairer and more equitable country for all of us and is fighting against President Trump’s regression agenda. Learn more and take action here >> https://t.co/bi8ye1fvoz pic.twitter.com/kr6ckbx1sc
– Ben & Jerry (@benandjerrys) October 30, 2018
When Peter Tell Krubb, president of the company’s ice cream division, was allegedly blocked the planned anti-Trump inauguration Day Post, complaints about tamping Ben & Jerry’s political message came to mind.
“Within 24 hours after Mr Terkerve blocked an inauguration post on the grounds that he was a ‘partisan’, he hosted an ice cream town hall and publicly promoted that Mr Pertz was the person who introduced Elon Musk to Donald Trump,” the lawsuit reads.
Ben & Jerry’s activist streak, once a source of mutual pride, has become Unilever’s corporate responsibility in recent years. Ben & Jerry’s statement on social justice and foreign policy, particularly the controversy over the 2021 decision to cease sales on Israeli territory, has elicited backlash from shareholders and political leaders. Unilever ultimately sold its Israeli business against the brand’s wishes, igniting internal legal friction and highlighting the deep cultural rift between the conglomerate and its presumably autonomous subsidiary.
“In 2000, Unilever loved who we were,” Cohen said. I said In an interview with the Wall Street Journal. “Now we have been on separate paths in our relationships. We need them to free us.”
Now, when Unilever leaves the ice cream business, Cohen is rushing to line up progressive investors in the hopes of the brand becoming independent again. However, it is unclear whether a brand can find a buyer without abandoning the politics it considers sacred by its founders, as the company’s social justice baggage is now considered responsible.
The original 2000 acquisition agreement allowed Ben & Jerry to control a “social mission,” a clause that proved to be flammable as the brand turns further left. Black Live defends the cause of American Indian land compensation.
“Ben & Jerry is a company with a soul,” Cohen continued. “Business is the most powerful force in our society, and for that, it is our responsibility.”
Unilever’s $7.5 billion ice cream business includes other major names such as Magnum and Breyers, and the company has yet to say whether it will sell Ben & Jerry as an independent asset or include it in the broader IPO.
Unilever did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation is an independent, nonpartisan newswire service that is free to use for legitimate news publishers that can provide large audiences. All republished articles must include logos, reporter signatures and DCNF affiliation. For questions regarding our guidelines or partnerships with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
