On the occasion of America’s 247th birthday, Ben & Jerry’s, the well-known ice cream company, sparked a fiery online debate.
Using its social media platform, the company pointedly suggested that America “exists on stolen Indigenous land,” prompting calls for its restitution. This controversial stance was, as you might expect, met with strong opposition, particularly from those with a deep-rooted love for our country.
Ben & Jerry’s July 4 post read, “This 4th of July, it’s high time we recognize that the US exists on stolen Indigenous land and commit to returning it.” This public message was accompanied by an action plan on their website, which drew criticism for its assertion that traditional Independence Day festivities were problematic.
Instead of recognizing the wealth of opportunities America provided to co-founders Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield, and the company’s current leadership, Ben & Jerry’s suggested that Mount Rushmore, the iconic landmark etched with the faces of Presidents George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln, and Theodore Roosevelt, be returned to the Lakota Sioux.
They went on to label these eminent leaders as “colonizers,” arguing that returning the monument would contribute to the dismantling of “white supremacy and systems of oppression.”
This isn’t the first time the ice cream company has been at odds with more conservative views.
Ben & Jerry’s recently expressed unhappiness over the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision—upholding states’ rights to determine regional abortion laws—and continues to resist pro-Israel sentiment, even refusing to sell its products in Israeli territories.
The company was previously exposed by the New York Times for using child migrant labor in violation of labor laws.
Their radical viewpoints, often spread via social media, have provoked strong reactions from critics.
After the company’s July 4 post, many conservatives called for a change in the company’s course of action.
Chris Elston, known as Billboard Chris, a critic of gender ideology, responded by urging the company to donate all its assets and retained earnings.
Musician Brad Skistimas of Five Times August echoed this sentiment, suggesting that all profits should go to Indigenous people.
Further adding to the company’s woes, Republican Senator Mike Lee of Utah called out Ben & Jerry’s connection to Unilever, an Anglo-Dutch conglomerate, in a fiery tweet.
He questioned whether the company fully understood the legacy of Dutch and British colonial powers, and expressed his personal decision to no longer support their products.
Lee also recommended Brooker’s Founding Flavors Ice Cream, a brand he claimed is “made by true American patriots.”
Some critics, like country music singer John Rich, drew parallels between Ben & Jerry’s and Anheuser-Busch’s Bud Light, which faced significant losses after partnering with transvestite activist Dylan Mulvaney.
Rich suggested a similar market correction for Ben & Jerry’s could be on the horizon.
Despite the overwhelming backlash, the ice cream company has yet to respond or revise its stance.
This leaves many Americans wondering if they’re about to get the Bud Light treatment.
RELATED: Ben & Jerry’s Releases Cop-Hating Ice Cream Flavor, Backs Bill to Replace Cops with Social Workers
