Park Slope Food Coop members approved a boycott of Israeli goods Tuesday night — following a yearslong food fight that has turned vicious.
Over 7,000 of the coop’s 15,000 members attended the meeting, which had to be shifted to Zoom only after Jewish attendees cited “explicit fears” for their safety if they attended in person.
The huge turnout, which many said was the largest in the coop’s 53-year history, comes after months of heated debate at the Brooklyn institution that has spilled out onto the lefty enclave’s streets.
The boycott passed by a vote of 67% in favor to 31% against, with 2% abstaining.
The debate over whether the coop should join the anti-Israel boycott, divestment, sanctions, or BDS, movement over a handful of Israeli groceries led to an antisemitic outburst at a meeting last month, as well as accusations that the Jewish members were supporting genocide.
The coop’s last Israel boycott vote, in 2012, drew only 2,000 attendees. Usual meetings can range from 50 to 200 members, according to Ramon Maislen, a longtime coop member.
“The coop used to feel like Brooklyn’s living room; now, every meeting feels like Judgment Day at noon,” Maislen said.
“Whatever our politics, we should be able to disagree without condemning one another.”
The Tuesday meeting’s agenda included routine, businesslike elections to the Revolving Loan Committee and the Pension Education Committee.
But the main event was a pair of votes over voting thresholds for boycotts, and whether to remove Israeli hummus, matzo and other goods from shelves.
While all members can vote, the coop board votes at the end, and its vote is decisive, Maislen said.
“They’re supposed to be influenced by membership votes, but they are technically not required to be.”
The meeting itself descended into chaos after the Zoom polling malfunctioned and took multiple attempts to get right. At one point, a motion to postpone the entire meeting was put forward.
But as the meeting stretched into its third hour, members voted by a show of hands to keep going.
And eventually, well after 9 p.m., the first key vote of the night — the procedural maneuver to lower the threshold for boycotting products from 75% to a simple majority — got underway.
Sixty-one percent of members voted to restore the simple majority rule, 38% voted no, and 1% abstained. The change took effect immediately, impacting the following boycott vote.
The second was the vote on the actual ban, which passed with the 67% majority.
Had the supermajority requirement held, the boycott would not have passed.
Almost immediately, many Jewish members expressed outrage at a motion earlier in the meeting, which passed, to move straight to voting on the boycott without allowing any anti-boycott proponents to speak up.
“The motion was proposed after only the pro-BDS group spoke,” one attendee, who preferred to remain anonymous, told The Post. “It’s horrible.”
“This is the first time in 15 years an item has been voted on without discussion,” a disgusted attendee at the meet noted.
“I definitely see a lawsuit coming,” another told The Post. “Especially if you change voting rules the same night a vote is set to occur.”
Ahead of the meeting, coop general coordinators Ann Herpel and Matt Hoagland urged members to maintain a respectful, cooperative tone when speaking, acknowledging the “highly contested and intense interest” the BDS vote has sparked among members.
“Members may hold deeply different views on these issues but personal attacks, inflammatory language, or any comments directed at anyone’s identity such as religion, ethnicity, or national origin are unacceptable,” the email read. “Recording the meeting is prohibited.”
Regardless of the outcome, some members feel the controversial spectacle divided members when it should have been an opportunity to unite them.
“Here we are getting all this publicity, and we could be using it to amplify the voices working for co-existence and a shared future,” said member Barbara Mazor.
“But instead, we are just rehashing the same stuff that doesn’t help anybody.”
此内容由惯性聚合(RSS阅读器)自动聚合整理，仅供阅读参考。 原文来自 — 版权归原作者所有。