The CEO of Mullvad is the main financer of the Swedish Örebro party
A co-founder of privacy-focused VPN provider Mullvad has been revealed as the main financial backer of Sweden’s small Örebro Party, which promotes strict immigration policies and “remigration,” prompting users to question whether their subscription fees are indirectly funding extremist politics. Commenters debate how to classify the party’s ideology, whether it is fair or necessary to boycott services over founders’ private political donations, and how much a VPN’s trustworthiness depends on the personal views of its owners. Mullvad’s other co-CEO responds that the company’s mission is limited to privacy and free expression, arguing that employees’ and founders’ wider politics are separate from the service, while some users say they will still switch providers.
Donation and basic facts
- One of Mullvad’s two co-founders/co-CEOs personally donated several million SEK (~$500k) to the local Swedish Örebro Party.
- Thread cites that this represented about 75% of all donations to that party in a year, allegedly 3x more than all others combined.
- Many commenters see this as effectively making Mullvad revenue a key funding source for the party, even if the donation was “private.”
How extremist is the Örebro Party?
- Some posters label it “far-right” and highlight policies like “large scale remigration” and quotes about deporting people with immigrant roots even if born in Sweden.
- Others stress the party’s Marxist/left-economic roots: anti-privatization, lower politician salaries, more social housing, reduced working hours, free dental care, anti-EU/NATO.
- Several Swedes describe it as “radical populist,” “left-conservative,” or a horseshoe-theory mix: far-left economics plus hardline immigration/assimilation.
- There is disagreement over whether “remigration” here means ethnic cleansing vs. narrower deportation of criminal or non-assimilated immigrants; context is contested and partly unclear.
Mullvad’s official stance and internal disagreement
- The other co-founder states Mullvad is explicitly political on privacy (free speech, free information, right to privacy) but neutral on other issues.
- Emphasizes donation was a private act, not company policy; says founders and staff disagree on many topics, including this one.
- Acknowledges personally disliking the donation and that many colleagues do too, but defends a tolerant, viewpoint-diverse workplace.
- Offers refunds to customers leaving for “philosophical reasons” but rejects using Mullvad as a vehicle to punish private political choices.
User reactions and boycotts
- Many long‑time customers say they will cancel, not wanting their money to indirectly fund a party they see as racist or pro–ethnic cleansing.
- Others explicitly don’t care, judging Mullvad only by technical/privacy performance, or arguing that perfect ethical consumption is impossible.
- Some note they already boycott other products over founders’ politics (e.g., Tesla, Amazon) and see this as consistent; others call this impractical or selective.
Privacy, VPN trust, and politics
- Several note VPNs are inherently trust-based; founder backing an authoritarian-leaning party undermines that trust for them.
- Others argue right‑libertarian or anti-state founders often build strong privacy tools, and political heterogeneity in a privacy company is expected.
- Alternative VPNs like Proton, AirVPN, IVPN are mentioned, but Proton is noted to have its own controversy around its CEO’s perceived right-leaning statements.
Broader debates
- Large subthreads debate immigration, integration vs. assimilation, multiculturalism, and racism, using Sweden and Japan as examples.
- There is extensive argument over left/right labels, nationalism, and whether policies like deportations are inherently “right-wing.”
- Popper’s “paradox of tolerance” is invoked both to justify cutting ties with intolerant movements and criticized as overused to rationalize deplatforming.