Ben & Jerry’s New Anti-Trump Ice Cream Flavor Is Nuts

This undated product image provided by Ben & Jerry’s shows the rebranded ice cream flavor Pecan Resist. Ben & Jerry’s says it’s taking a stand against what it calls the Trump administration’s regressive policies with the ice cream flavor. The company and its founders are unveiling the limited batch ice cream flavor Tuesday, Oct. 30, 2018, in Washington ahead of the mid-term elections. (Ben & Jerry’s via AP)

Ben & Jerry’s latest ice cream campaign is courting controversy twice over. One, the company is calling on ice cream lovers everywhere to oppose the Trump administration’s agenda. Two, it’s embracing a pronunciation of “pecan” — as in “PEE-can” — that’s really only popular along stretches of the East Coast from Maine to South Carolina.

“Today we launch Pecan Resist!” the company tweeted on Tuesday. “This flavor supports groups creating a more just and equitable nation for us all, and who are fighting President Trump’s regressive agenda.”

According to the Ben & Jerry’s website, the “Pecan Resist” flavor offers an assorted taste of chocolate ice cream immersed with “white & dark fudge chunks, pecans, walnuts & fudge-covered almonds.” But there’s more to this ice cream than what meets the eye: the derailment of President Trump’s MAGA train.

“Alongside all those nutty chunks, this pint packs a powerful message under its lid: together, we can build a more just and equitable tomorrow,” the site says of the flavor. “We can peacefully resist the Trump administration’s regressive and discriminatory policies and build a future that values inclusivity, equality, and justice for people of color, women, the LGBTQ community, refugees, and immigrants.”

The “Pecan Resist” flavor supports four far-left organizations dedicated to the resistance: Color of Change, Honor the Earth, Neta, and Women’s March. The site does not specify exactly how much of the portions will go to those organizations or if Ben & Jerry’s plans to profit in any way from “Pecan Resist.”


(c) 2018, Bloomberg · Jordyn Holman



    • Chazal were worried that one might end up eating milk from a non kosher animal, so they made a gezeira that we can only eat milk which was supervised by a jew as it was being processed. The Pri Chadash discusses a case where we know the milk is from a kosher animal (there’s one goyish farmer in town, he’s always drunk, he has a small 10 foot x 12 foot field, he has only one animal there, the animal is clearly a cow, there aren’t any pigs or camels for 100 miles around, if he sells one bottle of milk every day, we all know that it’s from a kosher animal), and the Pri Chadash says that the gezeira does not apply in that case, and one could eat milk from that farmer even if it wasn’t supervised. Most other poskim disagreed and held that one could not use that farmer’s milk, and the accepted practice in Europe was not to rely on the Pri Chadash. In America, HaRav Moshe Feinstein zt”l argued that even though the minhag was not to rely on the Pri Chadash, in America the commercially produced milk was different than the milk in Europe, because the fact that the company will get a fine if they are caught doing something wrong lends credibility to the kashrus of the milk, so there is no minhag to not rely on the Pri Chadash with American milk, and the arguments can start fresh (as opposed to in Europe, where even if a posek would decide that the Pri Chadash is correct, he couldn’t pasken like that because there was already an established minhag otherwise), and one has the right to rely on the Pri Chadash just like in every machlokes without an established minhag where one can rely on the meikal. Others argue and say that we are 100% confident that the companies in America are selling milk from kosher animals, just like we are 100% confident that the drunk farmer on his 10×12 farm was selling mik from a kosher animal, yet the minhag was not to rely on that confidence, and to only eat milk that was supervised by a Jew as it was being processed.
      Relying on the Pri Chadash does not make one the worst kind of lowlife meturuf, or a rasha mirusha, yet it still might not be the best thing to do based on the arguments mentioned above.
      I hope that was clear.
      What I’m about to say has nothing to do with the Pri Chadash or R’ Moshe or kashrus, but I hope that they are boycotted by enough people so that they feel it. Generally, liberals run successful boycotts, for the same reason that they hold successful protests – there are plenty of liberal people who have nothing to do other than to organize and to participate in boycotts and protests. Those on the right end of politics usually have stuff to do with their lives, and are too busy to deal which these things, so the boycotts and protests don’t end up happening.

  1. Don’t eat their ice cream. Their products shouldn’t even have a hechsher (if it does). A restaurant serving kosher food but has a pritzus dancer should get a hechsher? The same with Ben & Jerky ice cream. It “may” be kosher but they espouse anti-frum, anti-American, pro toeivah values. Feh.

  2. What about inclusivity, equality, and justice for people who follow the Torah and bnei Noach who keep the sheva mitzvos? There have been parents with children in public schools who are upset about the curriculim their children have to learn. People who choose to give their children a religious education do not get equality with government funding for educational expenses. They are forced to rent to people who have no values. Where is the inclusivity for G-d in these “liberal” people?

  3. Sad strange irony is that this ice cream company was started by two Jews; Ben Cohen and Jerry Greenfield.
    I choose Häagen-Dazs -it was also invented by a Jew; Reuben Mattis.

Leave a Reply to Anonymous Cancel reply

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here