On 28 March this year, more than 3,000 “No Kings” protests took place in the United States and other countries. An estimated eight million participants mobilised to oppose US President Donald Trump’s “authoritarian power grabs” over immigration, economic policy, and foreign military interventions. One participant warned: “What we’re living through, in the United States and around the world, has a name… Authoritarianism concentrates power in the hands of a few at the expense of everyone else’s freedom. It targets the most vulnerable first… And it does not stop there”. This warning came not from a politician or campaigner, but from ice cream company Ben & Jerry’s. NO VANILLA ACTIVISM Ben & Jerry’s involvement in the No Kings movement is an example of corporate political activism, whereby a business takes a public stance on a contentious sociopolitical issue. Once the preserve of only a handful of companies (Ben & Jerry’s among them), corporate activism has become a mainstream business practice in recent years. One prominent example is Nike’s advertisements featuring former NFL star Colin Kaepernick, advocating for racial equality. In Britain, cosmetics maker Lush recently campaigned with the Migrants’ Rights Network, using its storefronts to raise awareness and funding for migrants “in solidarity with… their fight for rights and justice”. Corporate political activism is distinctive because it entails companies engaging in political causes which are generally unrelated to their day-to-day business activities. This differentiates it from corporate lobbying, where businesses engage in the political process for purely instrumental, financial reasons (for instance, oil companies petitioning the government for looser environmental regulations). Another distinctive feature is that the political issues corporate activism engages with are contentious. They are important to the public, and divide opinion – split into passionate “for” and “against” sides. By supporting No Kings, Ben & Jerry’s took a side on the issue of Donald Trump’s presidency – on which American public opinion is polarised along party lines. Whereas businesses have traditionally sought to avoid public involvement in political controversies, “activist” businesses address controversies head-on, often drawing polarised consumer responses. CORPORATE INFLUENCE By taking stances on controversial political issues, companies can influence not only public attitudes, but governments and laws. Historically, corporate attempts to influence the democratic process have been controversial, because corporations are not democratically accountable and their leaders are not democratically elected. This raises a question regarding Ben & Jerry’s recent activism: can a business plausibly run a prodemocracy campaign? After all, corporations are not political parties. They answer to their shareholders, rather than to voting citizens. Nor are they social movements. They are designed to maximise profits, rather than serve a cause or the public interest more broadly. Ben & Jerry’s is part of the Magnum Ice Cream Company: a multi-billion-pound, multinational corporation. Perhaps Ben & Jerry’s, with left-leaning consumers in mind, publicly opposes Trump simply to sell more ice cream. From this perspective, corporate activism looks rather like corporate lobbying: a profit-seeking activity. PUBLIC ACTIONS Yet unlike lobbying, corporate activism is not conducted behind closed doors, but publicly. Its audience is not just politicians, but the public. Ben & Jerry’s even joined marchers on a “No Kings” rally in their hometown of Burlington, Vermont, carrying a banner reading “Resist Together!”. They were not trying to influence politics clandestinely, but transparently – openly communicating their values and position. Does the open, transparent character of corporate political activism mean that it is more democratically acceptable than lobbying? It is true that we can see, praise, and criticise Ben & Jerry’s’ political actions. But we cannot “vote” Ben & Jerry’s’ leadership out of office if we disagree with them. Moreover, Ben & Jerry’s’ activism 12 | trAnsfoRming toMorrow Listen to Lewis talking about his research on the Transforming Tomorrow podcast episode Corporate Political Activism:
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTI5NzM=