> are you saying that this right should only be afforded to those who pay for it

Not at all. When we say we believe privacy is a universal right, we're saying that e.g. states and corporations that actively violate your privacy are in the wrong. We're not saying that Mullvad, you or anyone else are obligated to work for free in order to provide privacy as a service.

Does that make sense?

Surely this has to be in bad faith. You cannot seriously be shaming a company for charging for their services, can you?

I think you know that this service is impossible to provide for free, and that the quality to cost ratio of Mullvad's service is highly competitive.