upvote

points

by daneel_w2 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby have_faith23 minutes ago|
next
[-]
There's nothing wrong with acting on new information as and when it surfaces in your life without obsessively staying up to date with every entity you engage with. That's the reasonable, pragmatic approach to trying to do the right thing without overwhelming yourself with the burden of being perfect.

It's not a gotcha if you're inconsistent from an outsiders perspective, we're all doing the best we can with what little insight we have into reality.

reply
upvoteby corford58 minutes ago|
prev|
next
[-]
>do you actively scrutinize and examine the key people of every service and product you use

Yes

>or it just a reflexive change of footing whenever you happen upon news like this?

No (only when my personal screening didn't already flag it)

>do you really switch

Yes, where it's feasible

reply
upvoteby dnlzro49 minutes ago|
parent|
[-]
> Yes, where it's feasible

I think that's what a lot of people in this thread are missing. There are alternatives to Mullvad, so it's pretty easy to take your money elsewhere if you're unhappy with where it's being spent right now.

The counter-reaction to the reaction is so dumb. If you think it's silly to boycott a company because of a co-founders political donations, fine. But it's just as silly to try to argue people into not boycotting. Live and let live.

reply
upvoteby mrhottakes2 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
You can just say "I don't care if people have hateful politics". It's much easier.
reply
upvoteby anthonyrstevens2 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
[flagged]
reply
upvoteby mrhottakes2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
So just say "I don't care when people have hateful politics as long as they're useful to me"
reply
upvoteby daneel_w2 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
[flagged]
reply
upvoteby tencentshill1 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
It gives me an excuse to really examine why I started using their product or service and take the time to research alternatives. If the alternative is better, great. If not, what am I willing to lose? Money, convenience, reliability? These are questions you don't want a happy paying customer asking.
reply
upvoteby nananana92 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
> do you actively scrutinize and examine the key people of every service and product you use

No.

> is it just a reflexive change of footing whenever you happen upon news like this

Yes.

> do you really switch

Yes.

What is the implication here? That because I did not know that a percentage of the money I give a company went towards supporting a party whose I that I find disgusting, I should keep supporting them now that I do know?

reply
upvoteby bix62 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
If alternatives exist some of us are willing to make changes to not support the worst of the worst when their behavior is revealed.

I used to like Musk, now I see Tesla and am disgusted. Maybe he was always like this but the personal line for me was the salutes. I’m sure many others have lines as well.

reply
upvoteby daneel_w2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
How do you know the political party of the story is "the worst of the worst"? You don't.
reply
upvoteby pesus2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Have you considered that people are capable of reading and learning what the party supports? I assume most people here are capable of reading and can google things. Just spamming "you don't know what the party's policies are!" doesn't actually make it true, nor is it a defense for the party.
reply
upvoteby daneel_w2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I don't need to consider their capacity for it. Of course they are capable of it, they just can't be bothered. Their echoing of "far-right", "worst of the worst" etc. sentiment of the original article shows it. Also, I don't vote for the party, nor do I give my money to Mullvad. I don't comment in order to defend them, I comment because I feel a need to call out the moralistic knee-jerk BS I see.
reply
upvoteby Dylan168072 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Please stop insisting that other people didn't do any research into the party based on absolutely no evidence. It doesn't take long to look into the party.
reply
upvoteby daneel_w1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
You're right, it doesn't take long. That's the sad part. The evidence is in them echoing just one single cherry-picked policy, in a misrepresented way, while conveniently ignoring all their other far more numerous left-leaning policies.
reply
upvoteby Dylan168071 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
The good policies don't make up for the really bad one. In this context it doesn't matter if it's ""cherry-picked"".

Other than fuss about how to define left and right I haven't seen anything that qualifies as misrepresentation.

"Echoing" looks the same as "agreeeing" so that's hardly evidence of people failing to do enough research.

reply
upvoteby daneel_w1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
The "really bad one" is a policy calling for what in the Swedish debate is now termed "re-migration" of families who sustain themselves and their children, in their entirety, solely on crime and fraudulent extractions from the welfare system, while actively rejecting integration, education and employment. The misrepresentation is that the policy is strictly about non-white residents, all of them, on the sole merit of race and ethnicity.
reply
upvoteby pesus2 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
[flagged]
reply
upvoteby daneel_w2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
There isn't any ethnic cleansing in their policies, neither direct nor indirect, and your veiled accusations are just disingenuous. You're not arguing in good faith at all.
reply
upvoteby pesus2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Getting rid of everyone who is not white is in fact ethnic cleansing, whether you like it or not. This is what their "remigration" policy is, and what the party leader has said. This is all out in the open, and only takes a few minutes at most to read up on. It's very ironic that you keep insisting others haven't read up on the party when you clearly haven't.
reply
upvoteby daneel_w1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
You're willfully and in a most dishonest way misrepresenting their "re-migration" policy.
reply
upvoteby pesus1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
The party leader himself disagrees with you. Frantically spamming the thread with "you're a liar!!" doesn't actually change the facts.

> "They will also be forced to leave, even if they are born in Sweden, because they have no natural connection to Sweden. They are not Swedish."

reply
upvoteby fzeroracer2 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Generally speaking, if the mission of a company is privacy and then the actions of the c-suite or founders indicates that they are more than willing to compromise on that, then yes. Why shouldnt you scrutinize people whose product is not aligned with their goals?

And yes I do actively switch products. I left the Windows ecosystem for Linux and I will leave Mullvad for whatever else pops up. So it goes.

reply
upvoteby anthonyrstevens2 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
[flagged]
reply
upvoteby al_borland2 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
[flagged]
reply
upvoteby raffael_de38 minutes ago|
parent|
next
[-]
same here. and the so-called political left is anyway mostly pro surveillance and censorship to curb what they consider fake news or agitation. (so-called b/c the terms left and right are actually pretty meaningless nowadays imo)
reply
upvoteby dgellow1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
What you call common sense is considered ethnic cleansing
reply