Berkeley Bakery Owners Cite Activism Alongside Rising Costs
Nabolom Bakery & Pizzeria in Berkeley, California, is closing permanently after 50 years in business. Co-owners Sabra Stepak and Julia Elliott have pointed to several pressures behind the decision, including rising operating costs, lost customer traffic, financial debt and the bakery’s own political activism.
In statements, including a Facebook post, the owners described a business operating on thin profit margins. Nabolom depends on steady customer volume, but the owners said higher prices for ingredients, utilities and labor have made that increasingly difficult. The loss of foot traffic damaged revenue even further.
The financial situation had become severe. According to the report, Nabolom is $30,000 in debt and two months behind on rent. Those figures help explain why the owners ultimately decided that keeping the bakery open was no longer sustainable.
Still, the closure carries a political dimension because the owners reportedly acknowledged that their activism played a primary role in the bakery’s downfall. That admission places politics alongside the more familiar pressures facing small businesses, including higher expenses and fewer customers.
Nabolom has deep roots in Berkeley’s alternative food culture. It opened in 1976 as a worker collective and became known for its breads and pastries. For a time, it was a popular local mainstay. After the original collective closed the business in 2015, Elliott and Stepak purchased Nabolom and reopened it about six months later. The report identifies 2016 as the year they took it over after an earlier near-closure.
The source commentary uses the shutdown to make a broader argument about companies that mix business with progressive politics. Its position is that a business can survive only if enough customers continue walking through the door, regardless of the owners’ ideology. When costs rise and margins are already thin, losing foot traffic can quickly become decisive.
A common liberal response to stories like this is, “The business was always woke…” The argument is that activism could not be responsible for the closure because the business had held those views for years. The commentary pushes back by arguing that public tolerance can change. It contrasts liberalism that was considered quaint in 2006 with ideas it says are viewed as dangerous and reprehensible in 2026.
The phrase “inclusive capitalism” also appears in that broader critique. The source argues that support for corporate political messaging has weakened and that companies should be cautious about turning their operations into platforms for ideology. In that view, businesses may express whatever political positions they choose, but consumers remain free to respond with their wallets.
Nabolom’s closure does not establish that activism alone caused the shutdown. The owners also cited higher prices, reduced foot traffic, debt and overdue rent. But their acknowledgment that political activism was a primary factor gives the story its central significance. For businesses operating on narrow margins, the report argues, political messaging can become another risk when customers decide to stay away.
Read the original report at The Liberty Daily.