Ice cream brand Ben & Jerry’s said in a lawsuit filed Wednesday that parent company Unilever has silenced its attempts to express support for Palestinian refugees, and threatened to dismantle its board and sue its members over the issue.

The lawsuit is the latest sign of the long-simmering tensions between Ben & Jerry’s and consumer products maker Unilever. A rift erupted between the two in 2021 after Ben & Jerry’s said it would stop selling its products in the Israeli-occupied West Bank because it was inconsistent with its values, a move that led some to divest Unilever shares.

The ice cream maker then sued Unilever for selling its business in Israel to its licensee there, which allowed marketing in the West Bank and Israel to continue. That lawsuit was settled in 2022.

  • Ænima
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    15 hours ago

    B&G have a good chance of coming out of this stronger than ever and with bigger profits. If Gaza was so bad that people could not bring themselves to elect a VP (who has no say in anything in the administration does) to the presidency, hopefully those people are gonna go full blown diabetic eating all their fucking ice cream for the next 4+ years.

    • modifier@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      15 hours ago

      You think way way way too much of voters if you think Gaza lost her the election. Pardon me if I’m completely misconstruing your comment.

      • tootoughtoremember@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        There were certainly votes lost in Michigan over Gaza, but even if every single Jill Stein vote was a protest vote (they weren’t), it wouldn’t have been enough for Harris to carry the state.

        The tougher thing to parse is the reason why so many voters seemingly stayed home this cycle. I think there is a very reasonable argument that not enough people were excited about her message, even the base.

        It’s a lot easier for door knockers, phone bankers, and everyday democrats to talk proudly about their candidate if they can rattle off a list of great things their candidate will do. It’s even easier if those great things hit people where they’re hurting the hardest or is the moral thing to do (healthcare for the uninsured, ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, etc.). It’s a lot tougher to get low propensity voters to show up on the harm reduction argument alone, especially if you brush past where they’re hurting or concede too much ground on your moral positions.

        The biggest issue for most voters appears to have been inflation and the economy, and while democrats were technically correct to say the rate of inflation has come down and American economic indicators outperformed most other countries in this post-pandemic period, that’s all pretty meaningless to someone whose real wage growth didn’t keep up with inflation these past few years. The “opportunity economy” and targeted small business tax cuts is a much tougher sell to someone working two+ jobs to get by.

        The other issue that dominated the media was immigration. Democrats forfeited their moral position when they offered the republican wishlist border bill earlier this year. The argument that republicans weren’t serious on the border because they didn’t support the bill fell flat, and instead democrats were (rightly) criticized for abandoning their framing of the issue as a choice between deportation and amnesty, and their previous claims the border wall was racist.

        All of that to say, democrats failed to connect with their own base on the issues that make them the party’s best messengers. Add Gaza to the list of issues where Harris could have pivoted away from Biden, instead of running into the arms of the Cheneys to chase the mythical moderate republican voter.

    • IndustryStandard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Problem is that Ben &Jerry’s is still owned by Unilever. Supporting them means profits for Unilever which supports Israel. It is extremely paradoxical.

    • SoJB@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      13 hours ago

      It’s incredible how transparently you’re admitting you have no idea what you’re talking about.

      Although if liberals knew why they lost, they’d be too intelligent to be liberals.

      p.s “B&G” is a different company, bud.