By Jacob Kamaras
LA JOLLA, California — One thing is clear about the recent decision by Ben & Jerry’s to stop selling ice cream in what the company described as “Occupied Palestinian Territory” (referring to parts of the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem): Jewish opinions about the frozen products are on fire.
As the passionate reactions continue to pour in from Israel and across the Jewish world, there are still those — however hard they are to find — who remain on the fence about what to do next on a personal level when it comes to the Ben & Jerry’s product. Here’s an array of potential reactions:
Revenge Boycott
A common reaction among staunch supporters of Israel is to answer a boycott with a boycott — stop buying Ben & Jerry’s ice cream, and for the cherry on top, post a social media video of the process of dumping the remaining pints that are in your refrigerator. I like to call this response a “revenge boycott,” “reverse boycott,” or “reverse BDS.”
Buycott
If the country and people you support, in this case Israel and Jews, are boycotted, another possible response is a “buycott” — increase purchases of Israeli products, which are abundantly available in the U.S. This is a way to show solidarity without resorting to boycott tactics.
Take a Lick of the Law
The Ben & Jerry’s boycott is a pertinent legal issue across the U.S., given that more than 30 states have laws preventing pension funds from investing in companies that refuse to do business with Israel.
The state of Texas is getting involved in the high-profile ice cream dispute, with State Comptroller Glenn Hegar telling CNBC, “I’ve directed my staff to determine whether any specific action has been taken by Ben & Jerry’s or Unilever would trigger a listing under Chapter 808 of the Texas Government Code,” the law passed in 2017 which prohibits public retirement systems from investing in companies that boycott Israel.
Surely, the phone lines and email inboxes of governors and state lawmakers across the country are getting inundated with outreach from constituents who are opposing the Ben & Jerry’s boycott and calling on their state officials to take legislative action against the move.
Remain Frozen
For some (and often myself), fear of publicly expressing an opinion has a chilling effect — especially when it comes to the Ben & Jerry’s boycott, a topic on which it seems nobody is quite agnostic.
In that spirit, I wanted to use this column to muster up the courage to give some, if not all of my scoop on this fiery ice cream hubbub. I oppose discriminatory boycotts, including the BDS movement. But revenge boycotts aren’t my favorite flavor of response.
It’s anyone’s prerogative to buy Häagen-Dazs (the de facto new ice cream brand of the pro-Israel community) over Ben & Jerry’s. But for those who claim to oppose all boycotts (including the Ben & Jerry’s move) from a values perspective, framing purchase decisions as a proactive boycott of Ben & Jerry’s tastes hollow and hypocritical. At the end of the day, there can be such a thing as being the bigger person.
A buycott feels more appealing, with its focus on supporting Israel rather than mimicking the strategy of Israel’s detractors. So, I won’t regurgitate at the thought of a scoop of Ben & Jerry’s. But the next time I drink a glass of Israeli wine, I’ll have the ice cream manufacturer in mind.
And let’s also remember this: When you feel like judging someone else’s reaction to the controversy, hold the spoon for a second and consider that all opinions have a place in the discussion.
*
Jacob Kamaras is Managing Editor of the San Diego Jewish World.
“It’s anyone’s prerogative to buy Häagen-Dazs (the de facto new ice cream brand of the pro-Israel community) over Ben & Jerry’s. But for those who claim to oppose all boycotts (including the Ben & Jerry’s move) from a values perspective, framing purchase decisions as a proactive boycott of Ben & Jerry’s tastes hollow and hypocritical.”
Actually, it is the exact opposite. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.
Rhoda Smolow, national president of Hadassah, The Women’s Zionist Organization of America, issued the following statement:
“Whether they recognize it or not, companies like Ben & Jerry’s are engaging in an economic war driven by extremists determined to end Israel’s existence as a Jewish state. Hadassah believes the announcement by Ben & Jerry’s should trigger enforcement of anti-BDS laws and executive orders in 33 states. Unilever, the parent company of Ben & Jerry’s, must compel an immediate reversal by its subsidiary or be subject to divestment.
“Ben & Jerry’s is discriminating against Jewish customers in Israel by eliminating the ability for customers to buy their product based on where they live. Businesses should not cater to the whims of hardliners who believe that only certain people from certain places are fit to be customers. We are proud to stand as a united community against bigoted corporate policies and urge state officials to make swift determinations about the their responsibilities under existing law.”
In response to Texas State Comptroller Glenn Hegar’s comments regarding the state’s exploration of the legal ramifications of the Ben & Jerry’s boycott, Jewish businessman and philanthropist Mark Gerson issues the following statement:
“I’m not surprised Texas, a state filled with Evangelical friends of Israel, is leading the way. They led the way with passing anti-BDS bills and they have been leading the way in defending Israel against this economic violence being committed against the Arab and Jewish residents of East Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria. Texas’ leadership is yet another example of this truly great friendship, in the fullest meaning and of all seasons, between Jews and Evangelical Christians.”