Ice Cream on Occupy Wall Street: Conflict of Interest?

Ben and Jerry's gave out ice cream to the protesters on Wall Street this week.

This action generated a lot of questions for me: is it possible to be a corporate entity and support those protesting "corporate greed" and asking banks and their leaders to be accountable for money they received via the government bailout?

Is it possible to be a person or corporation that benefits from the current business models but to also see that there may be other possibilities?

Is it possible to fight for social causes and be concerned with making money/delivering value to your clients and shareholders?At what point does too much money become too much?What can social advocates and business leaders learn from each other?Can we be "one of them" and also "one of us?" How do we dance the the dance of duality and remain in dialogue to foster creative solutions?

We only need to look as far as our political leaders to see that once we get positional and dig our heels in, solutions are stymied. Staying connected and dialoguing is the goal. When that stops, game over.

One thing I do know - despite our many flaws, we live in a great country and we need each other now more than ever to get out of this mess alive. Can we dance in the gray areas? Can it be yes, and?

Yes, we can't be naive to agendas. Yes, a little ice cream can go a long way to smoothing edges and satiating hungry bellies.

What's your take on it?©