So if I use Mullvad, some of that is funding far-right politics?

"It should be obvious that Daniel's private donation to a political party is not part of Mullvad's values or mission, in the same way that someone's opinions on animal rights, taxes or public healthcare policy isn't."

I'm not sure what they mean by this. Plenty of corporations do make animal rights, taxes, public healthcare, etc. an important part of their values and mission. Why would it be obvious that they're not?

Besides, we do want Nazis and fascists to be pariahs. Putting pressure on Mullvad not to associate is a good thing.

I'm seriously worried about what's going on around this.

There is quite the push here for people to move to VPNs under the legals jurisdiction of surveillance heavy states, not just the US and UK but also places like Gibraltar and the British Virgin Islands which are British Overseas Territories with the same laws as Britain except were they passed specific local legislation that overrides British Law.

We're talking about places with Information Courts which issue secret mass surveillance orders to companies based in or operating there and it doesn't mater if that VPN is no logs because for all you know they've been forced to install realtime surveillance equipment/software and they can't even tell you because BY THE LAW OF WERE THEY OPERATE if they did so they would end up in jail.

I would expect that the kind of people who would leave Mullvad because one of it's owners is a far-right nutter are also the kind of people who don't want everything they do and say tracked by the likes of the US or UK.

Further, the push is pervasive. For example https://vpn.techlore.tech/ is supposed to help you choose a good VPN, only if you look at those VPNs based in British Overseas Territories (Gibraltar, BVI) they're listed as "Not 14-eyes" which that's bullshit - I was actually curious and went and look at how Legislation works in Gibraltar and, as I wrote above, they have the same as in Britain except were they wrote their own legislation that overrides British legislation, which means that (unless somebody can point me out the legislation in Gibraltar that overrides it), the very same legislation that support the mass surveillance activities in Britain as a member of not only the "14-eyes" international surveillance agreements but the actual "5-eyes" one, applies to Gibraltar and hence to the likes of IVPN.

Frankly, looking for a replacement for Mullvad whilst having some awareness of the mass surveillance shit in supposedly democratic nations is scary as fuck, since most VPNs, for all their (possibly theatrical) "No logs" and whatnot, are actually in places with Information Courts which can issue secret court orders forcing them to install mass surveillance equipment.

Absolutely, if all you care about is avoiding lawyer letters because of pirating stuff, any "No Logs" VPN will probably do, but if you're worried about the rise of the Far-Right then it makes sense that you're not into there being a real risk that all you're doing over your supposedly "No logs" VPN is in fact being logged directly into NSA or GCHQ systems (in the kind of country whose governments think being a leftwinger is "extremism" or even "terrorism"),

It should be obvious that [founder's] private donation to a political party is not part of [his company's] values or mission

Riiiiiiiiiight, because it always shakes out like that

If they are rich they are almost always a right wing asshole. Why would anyone be surprised by this?