I read it as he implicitly does understand that and is the reason he suggests getting a refund if that is your priority. He is just urging people to see nuance that there is collateral damage for the rest of the people that make mullvad too. A loose analogy would be, I disagree with Trump and I wish my country would divest from the USA, which is all well and good, but the workers don't have great protections and would likely be the first to hurt. Sure a majority of them voted for him I could rationalize, but that's not the same rationalisation companies use to layoff before they actually start to hurt.

Also i want to point out that understanding doesn't equal support. it's closer to validation, like, you can think what they're saying makes sense but disagree with it.

Understandable in that there's no way a company or employer can tell you how to spend your money. That there's 2 owners with divided beliefs who are working for a similar cause. They are indeed private individuals using their individually earned money for private purposes.

If, let's say, Mullvad as a company was donating to this political party, that would be alarming and worth freaking out about, but it's one guy, basically donating with his funds he makes from his job. In a corporate environment there are many different people with different beliefs, of different economic statuses. Somebody might be donating thousands to one candidate, another donating hundreds to another.

Just because the co-owner of a company you like supports somebody you don't like, doesn't mean you should jump ship. Who knows if everybody else in the company is donating to other political causes?