The CEO of Mullvad is the main financer of the Swedish Örebro party

I don't think "appetite to discuss" should be a justification to override the guidelines against political submissions and discussion. There is far too much politics on HN and it leaks into unrelated discussions too. There are plenty of other places to discuss politics on the internet.

The comment from the other Mullvad founder is here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48696800

What has been removed? The links I saw didn't have much information but as far as I can tell they're still up. From an HN point of view the idea is to give the discussion a place, since the community obviously wants to have it.

Well the title already says most of it, doesn't it? I'm also surprised. Usually opinions opposing the far right are removed from HN.

[deleted]

I'm sorry to hear that. I'm not defending his choice, but consider reading Daniel's rationale in the Flamman article. There's also his blog [1], which explains some of his views. I know he doesn't share all of Örebropartiets views, but I should let him provide that nuance. As I said in another comment, speaking for myself, I don’t like that he made this donation and I know this view is shared by many of my colleagues. [1]: https://dberntsson.info

If you bought the product, the money went to the company. You don't need to take personal responsibility beyond that, and the company isn't doing the thing you hate so much. By the same token that "some of your money might end up (after many twists and turns) empowering politics you find repugnant", a much bigger share of this money is paying for the food on the table of the employees, their families and their children. How many people unrelated with your personal gripe, people that were doing a good job since you were paying and satisfied customer, are you willing to punish in order to "send a message"? This is an impossible standard to live by and demand from everything you buy and every service you pay for. Doubly so if you need to announce to the world you're dropping a product because of something that isn't done by or responsibility of its employees.

> If it were a small amount of money, it wouldn’t be an issue. I'm not speaking for or against anyone's views for or against anything here, but it's worth noting that Brendan Eich's $1K donation caused quite the stir.

I am sympathetic to the sentiment, but the argument does not hold water. > the fact remains some of my money can end up empowering politics I find repugnant are you paying taxes? are you using gasoline? are you paying for amazon? Some ratio of your money will always go toward something you hate. The big question is: is for a mulvad subscription that ratio bigger than for the alternative? The next question is: how is the ratio for things you like?

I am so so disappointed with Mullvad and this founder. I can’t believe I let myself get suckered and then paid up-front for the year again. The only influence I have is with my money.

> I'm a long-time Mullvad customer, and I respect what the company has been doing and the pro-privacy political stance it openly and publicly stands for. Thank you.

> Which is of course why people are publicizing this donation and publicly stating that they will no longer do business with Mullvad because of it. But you're doing the same thing, making the same threat. You've only escalated it from a conscientious protest to a Mexican stand off. I'm not icked-out by immigration discussion, but I am concerned by business owners starting down a political path. VPNs are not a very glamorous segment of the industry, and Mullvad had carved out a niche in taking a neutral side and fostering trust through a transparent product. My former boss spoke well of them and visited their sites in-person after hearing the marketing line about their RAM-only VPNs. Their appeal was not in protecting politicized speech, but protecting all speech and defending it as an apolitical technological imperative. Now more than ever, it's hard for me to believe their brand identity. You're allowed to have political opinions, voice them and vote for them when you're a CEO. But spending your paycheck on inordinate political investments is how you ask for a boycott. It's how I would feel about any political investment that their CEOs make, and its already tarnished the Mullvad brand for me.

The speech people are objecting to isn't anti-immgiration. It is pro crimes against humanity against people who previously immigrated, and their descendants. A stance that Sweden should reduce the amount of immigration they accept would be utterly unremarkable and never result in outrage like this.

[deleted]

Not just “support”, it’s literally the main source of funds for the party. >70% of donations. If it was a small donation that would be sort of controversial but maybe defendable, but here we are talking about funding pretty much the whole party

Hi. I get what you mean. I made that post with limited time. Sorry to hear you're leaving.

Where will you move to? Are there any alternatives left? For me, Proton isn't one.. not sure what else there is.

I did the same, except I'm paying for Mullvad through the Tailscale partnership, so I reached out to them and expressed my desire for them to partner with other privacy focused VPN providers like Njalla, Airvpn and others. I don't feel great about my money funding ethno-fascists in my country.

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

Hi Kamaitachi, What you seem to be missing is that every single € you've spent on virtually anything in the past number of years, some of it has found its way to support organisations that have extreme racist views.

I'm sorry to hear that. Oh, I definitely agree with some of his political opinions, the obvious ones being around free speech, free press, and privacy. There are important issues where we don't agree. His values around empathy stretch to most sentient beings, and he believes I commit torture when I eat fish for lunch. And he's still willing to associate with me.

> that supports freedom ... for everyone Unless you happen to be of Somalian descent in Sweden. Then you should be ripped away from the only home you've ever known, indeed possibly the only country you've ever been in, and sent to a foreign country you have no citizenship in, where you have no home, don't understand the language, know no one, and be forced to try and survive.

Thank you!

Of course. Sorry to hear you're leaving. Thank you for the compliment.

It should be obvious that he's perfectly fine with your decision because he wrote exactly that in the post you just replied to.

Thank you. :)

Hi! No worries. I haven't spoken with Nick Pestell of IVPN in ages, but he's always struck me as genuine and empathetic. We met the first time at RightsCon in 2018 I believe. TunnelBear and ExpressVPN were also there. We all wrote this thing together: https://mullvad.net/en/blog/2018/10/17/signals-trustworthy-v... Since those conversations I've always thought that IVPN is closest aligned with Mullvad's values. Again, I haven't spoken with Nick in ages, so I don't know what IVPN is doing now.

Indeed. It matters to me. In fact, most of my political opinions have atrophied, or rather I have self-censored. Daniel believes that is not the right trade-off to make in this case. I understand his point of view, and disagree.

Can you point to the charter where the Örebro party ever said that you don't deserve to live? The embellishments of what people actually believe is extremely exhausting. FWIW, I'm an immigrant in Sweden and if they gained power I would be affected, but we talk about people with differing views to us as if they're actively violent in order to shut down conversation. This catasphrophising language will eventually not help your cause, because ordinary people start to feel numb to it and the hard-right will not be defeated by it.

> There ARE bad actors, they must be kept out. There are very good (and well-documented) reasons to believe a large part of the recently immigrated foreigners in Sweden are exactly such bad actors. Your arguments don't really work the way you seem to think they do.

Everyone has their own definition of a bad actor. The fact that you're implying to know how to spot them says a lot about your tolerance for differences in opinion.

Do you think any of the people publicly claiming that they will no longer do business with Mullvad because Daniel Berntsson donates to an anti-immigration political party, wouldn't make donating to that party an illegal, jail-able legal offense if they had the political power to do so?

I'm sorry to hear you'll be leaving us. To answer your question, we started building this organization in the summer of 2008 for idealistic reasons, and we are still idealists who think privacy is fundamental to a civilized society. The best strategy for achieving societal impact through entrepreneurship is consistent, long-term, and value-based ownership. For us, this disqualifies taking outside investment, either through venture capital or going public. Mullvad has instead been growing organically without outside investments. Our principles have withstood the test of time. Our conviction has remained unchanged through multiple serious offers of acquisition and outside investment. Words are cheap of course, but consistent action over the course of almost two decades is not. Mullvad is about privacy. Neither Daniel nor I have used Mullvad's brand to promote our personal opinions.

Hi! Thank you. Both Daniel and I are well aware of Karl Popper. We've both been interested in politics since we were teenagers.

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

> As a workplace I'm glad we're not a monoculture of 100% like-minded individuals. But if you're tolerant of someone in your workplace that wants to make it a monoculture, and then succeeds in doing so, will you remain glad?

I would like to add one note: if I were an activist in Iran, or in any other way my livelihood would depend on strong privacy services, I might keep using your service and even be (slightly) more certain of the company's resolve to keep my privacy protected. Although I would be very aware of the irony. But choosing for one's own safety can override other concerns. Very few things in life are black and white.

Ironically, remigration is a means to achieve a monoculture.

Time for a new VPN co then, right?

> the possibility that Daniel and I are able to keep our personal opinions separate from the mission of our company This isn't about opinions. Very large political financing is not a mere opinion. It has a much larger material effect. I don't think it's possible to separate "mission of our company" from "large scale political financing", for purely structural reasons. I think the legal and fiduciary concept of Conflict of Interest is relevant here, but perhaps only by analogy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest is quite informative. In some business, political and legal roles, we deem certain structural relations to be a conflict of interest regardless of what people on those roles actually do.. The mere potential for excessive improper influence arising from the structure of their relationships and roles is what creates the deemed conflict. As the owners of a company making substantial profit like Mullvad, you always had the potential capability to financially influence political outcomes on a scale which most your customers cannot, in ways that may seriously harm some of your customers and to be potentially against the stated mission of your company. I think the relationship between running a company with an openly advertised public mission, or even an implied mission in the minds of customers, while in another role (wealthy private citizen) being able to make a substantial material action against the same mission, should be recognised as inherently a conflict of interest. But obviously it's one we can't avoid, as long as we allow people to get rich from a mission-driven company. What we can do, is recognise that if someone actually takes a large material action against the company's mission, then they have gone a step further and demonstrated the conflict of interest. We generally favour free speech, including political donations. But when the money for very large political financing comes mostly from customers who, by virtue of the advertising and marketing of the company's mission, are led to believe they are supporting the company's mission? In my view, at that point the customers are being tricked into paying for something while their money is paying for something else which opposes the thing they thought they were funding. At the least, it should be dealt with in a similar way that conflicts of interest are dealt with when, for example, directing multiple companies: By making sure everyone knows, so other people are able to consent or not on the major conflict issues those other people might have a view on. The analogy for customers is their consent shown by their informed decision to become or remain customers. In Mullvad's situation, that would mean Mullvad should explain to customers, embedded clearly within it's public marketing of the company missions and values, that one of its current major owners receiving customer funds by way of profit, is the main financier of a political party which sponsors remigration in Sweden. Because that is clearly a thing some customers care about when evaluating whether to pay for Mullvad's services from now on. You know that, I know that, so there's no legitimate excuse for not letting customers who would care know. Then, as you said, customers will be free to choose.

The thing is, you can't be pro freedom of speech and pro privacy yet support right wing extremists. They are totally against that. It can only means that Daniel is setting up a trap with Mullvad.

Who sees the party as left wing? Its seems like a disingenuous argument to make.

> Some believe this party is left-wing, others right-wing. Some approve of it, others don't. For a company that puts political principle so fundamentally at the core of its marketing strategy, it's astonishing to see this kind of stance being taken. The man who owns half the company seemingly choosing to funnel his share of its profits to a political party that advocates the mass deportation of people is, in that context, something with significant consequences. I understand how awkward the position you're in must be, but it's obscene to present this as somehow being a thing that one can be morally neutral on. In the context of rising fascism across the continent, it's dismaying to see a company that a lot of us rely on so decisively pick the worst possible side.

Is your buddy incapable of speaking on his own behalf? Im sure he's aware of the reputational damage he's caused your company by now...

> People who failed so spectacularly that the country became the rape capital of Europe and has more crime than El Salvador today. > the rape capital of Europe I’ve read that this is because Sweden changed how rape is counted - instead of multiple votes instances within the same relationship being counted as “one rape”, each instance of non-consensual intercourse is counted individually. > and has more crime than El Salvador today I couldn’t find any reliable data here other than Sweden’s homicide rates are a little higher than historically, but still pretty low. And the comparison to El Salvador is off the mark in general because the murder rate there has fallen dramatically from where it was historically.

The crime rate in El Salvador is allegedly quite low these days, and I don't think Sweden has had a left-wing government since 2022. https://elsalvadorinfo.net/homicide-rate-in-el-salvador/

I think you'd be surprised at how quickly that sentiment has moved from the far-right to close to the center. People are (rightly, in my opinion) pretty upset at their governments for letting mass migration happen with pretty much only downsides for their actual citizens. People are all about the idea of helping the downtrodden when it's just an ideal, but when they realize it's having negative consequences for them that can easily change.

You have to consider the context which is that Sweden does have an awful lot of fake refugees mixed in with the real refugees. "Parasite" is harsh but unfortunately all too accurate for some of the migrants who are essentially gaming a system intended for people in real distress.

[deleted]

I think it’s quite important to understand in what context that have been said. The ”parasites” are immigrants that have not integrated, entire families and generations living off welfare and the ethnic group basically have a super high unemployment rate of maybe 50% or more. I’ve listened a lot to talks from the party leader of Örebropartiet, and while I think he would benefit from slowing himself down, yell and insult less, I really can’t see he being racist or far-right. More leftist actually. I think he’s simply VERY motivated/obsessed around questions like to get government less corrupt, much more efficient governence, and to stop major ethnic groups from very poor parts of the world get an unreasonable high amount of the governments welfare spending.

[deleted]

Maybe he was talking about beltway bandits, do they have those in Sweden?

Funny, I usually hear that sentiment from left wing sources complaining about billionaires.

[deleted]

> To me too, then I got to the leaders quote on TV: "We must deport these damn parasites who sit and live at our expense." Firstly, you should probably cite that. Searching for it leads here. Hopefully, you didn't manufacture it. But, while the language is unfortunate, do you really think natives should tolerate migrants who are not a net positive?

To understand why there might be a desire to limit spending on art; There was a recent case where city of Malmo was building a hospital; during the building of the hospital it was decided that a splice of the oldest tree in the world would be installed. A very expensive life-support system was developed and an enormous amount of money paid for the splice. (not including the life support system, which was also an inordinate amount). The tree didn't take, and needs to be replaced. It's called "Spruce Time": https://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/skane/region-skane-har-lag...

For context, from wiki: > Remigration is a far-right concept referring to ethnic cleansing via mass deportation of non-white minority populations [...] to their place of racial ancestry

> large scale remigration which is literally kicking out people who don't look or sounds like me, out of the country. Whenever that has happened it has been rather bad for most parties.

We want everyone here to be exactly like us, but we do recognize we have bad teeth.

[deleted]

It's definitely possible to be a left-wing nationalist

[deleted]

It's not an accident.

Not without precedent. Maybe they are big fans of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army.

i can think of one notable right-of-center European party that featured those colors heavily.

just "stricter policy" is an understatement. they want mass expulsions

It’s not a new idea. I’d put it at around ninety years old.

Lol, that quote really reads like "we have terminal direction-brain and can't place these people in our arbitrary categories"

The horseshoe still going strong

Fascists always incude left wing policies to try to appeal to the "working man". There's a reason the Nazis included "socialist" in their name. It's not because they give a crap about the plebs.

It is strange, because this party’s platform seems to mirror the positions of the blackest Swede I know (Malcolm Kyeyune, a Marxist writer who is also often accused of being a right-winger). I suspect that the divisions in Sweden are much deeper than race.

[deleted]

> The refusal to treat large scale immigration as a cultural and economic phenomneon > and insult opponents of this position as racist On the other hand, you treat the negative effects of current immigrant milieus as eternal and innert to their ancestry (dare to say: genes). This way, you can look at integration as if it has to happen in a single generation and also, allows you to ignore the more important part of diminishing social mobility, which effects the natives as much. Look at germany, where after WW2, alot of turkish "guest workers" were invited and stayed. After several generations the descendant of those immigrants are as german as you can be. They are still soft muslims, drink alcohol, engage with german bureaucracy, have a heavy turkish accent -- some of them are even candidates for the far right AfD. Please note, they migrated into an economic boom. Isnt that utterly ridiculous? When time proves you wrong, it reveals your narrow mindedness. And when you reduce immigrants to percieved negative innert properties, isnt that racist? When you broaden your scope, youll see the bigger problems are elsewhere, dont get distracted by bigotted populists, that are as clueless about problems or their solutions.

Only if you pretend the Sami's don't exist, right? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S%C3%A1mi_people

It took me 5 years to get the boat - a 22ft daycruiser with toilet. That was 15 years ago, haven't looked back. Got a daycruiser from the UK. Drove there, bought a trailer there, drove it home. Arbitrage during the financial crisis - half the price of the same boat in Sweden at the time.

[deleted]

If it's a nice country, you should expect people to want to go there.

If you think about what you said for just a second, you'll realize that, even ignoring how off-putting it is, it makes absolutely no logical sense.

[deleted]

Please make an effort to engage with this forum in good faith, instead of posting flame bait.

Why is the burden always on the host nation and never the immigrants?

I think it is very reasonable to demand _some_ integration: get a job, pay taxes, learn the language as best as you can, don't do crime. But at the same time, you should not be expected to give up your culture (as long as it is not doing something against the law).

GP literally addresses your points. I think we’re very welcoming in most of Europe, adopt others’ traditions, and are not too imposing. Just, you know, leave women alone and don’t aim fireworks at ambulances. Dismissing any amount of integration is chicanery. We’re pro-social creatures, and knowing the lay of the land makes your life better.

> I don't think it's reasonable to "demand" integration Yes, it is reasonable to demand people who come into a country adapt to rules - written and to a certain extent also the unwritten, of which Sweden has many - of that country. When in Rome, act as the Romans. This adaptation will never be 100% but that is not the point, what is most important is that newcomers learn to assimilate to such a level that the natives are open and willing to maybe integrate some parts of the newcomer's culture. People who 'are the last representatives of [their] culture' can write a book about it while becoming part of their new culture since it is clear that their old one did not stand the test of time. They're much better off that way instead of living like cultural fossils for the likes of NPR and PBS to make documentaries about. By all means document what that extinct culture had to offer but life is for the living and culture is the commonly agreed upon set of rules how to live it. Multiculturalism is a pipe dream, something dreamt up by people who listened to one too many version of John Lennon's Imagine. It has been shown not to work time and time again, it makes it harder for people coming in to a new country to assimilate and integrate because there is no clear target to aim for. Culture is not a fixed thing, it evolves through time by adopting new things and getting rid of old customs. Multiculturalism does not call for cultural evolution, it calls for revolution: here's a whole new culture, now deal with it. Revolution hardly every works and when it does it tends to go badly for those on the wrong side of it.

It’s a hot topic, but in Belgium some people are taught how to take the bus, do their taxes, and not harass women. One of my Dutch teachers led the integration course and said this stuff was really difficult to land. If you come from a culture of groping women, not doing is gonna be a challenge. I get it. But we’ve also built mosques and have pagan festivals and allow public servants to wear their choice of religious attire. I think it’s a balance, but nobody is ever happy with wherever you set the balance. When I learn the local language, I’m happier; it’s nice to talk to people. Not everyone agrees. Tja.

I’ve read a few books about dopamine/motivation/common neurotransmitters and this has never come up. In my amateurish view I think empathy is more connected to oxytocin (which afaik does release during social connections, which The book ”The molecule of more” covers a bit).

Depends on if Atlas Shrugged is your Bible or not.

They're so populist, in fact, that they require CEOs to donate them millions of dollars to constitute the backbone of their party. Oh wait, that's what political interest groups do.

And what does that have to do with the guy leaning right? He runs a VPN. If you care about privacy, that should be sufficient to support it, his other opinions aside.

+1 on AirVPN. They are amongst the handful of companies which successfully resisted the war on torrenting (targeting VPNs that allowed persistent ports) and still allow for port reservation. Mullvad, like most other VPNs gave in in the end and removed port reservations.

I've used both, and for me mullvad has worked a lot better. They seem more focused on VPN as core to what they do and don't leak data when reconnecting to a different server, and with proton I often experience that my connection stops working if my laptop gas been closed for some time, and the only way to make it work again is to reconnect to a new server. And then it leaks connections for a few seconds.

Do they have a CLI?

Does Proton keep logs? I’ve heard good things.

It’s worth noting that Proton’s CEO is also known to be a supporter of right-wing causes. There is no ethical consumption under capitalism. I keep along the effort, but it just continues to be impossible.

I think they're relying on the fact that "Nord" sounds like "Nordic", so consumers think "they must be a Swedish company, I hear some Swedish techies are hardcore on freedom, e.g. the PirateBay is Swedish!". In reality they're based in Panama, and their parent company is Dutch: https://support.nordvpn.com/hc/en-us/articles/19441152966161...

[deleted]

Without wishing to defend Tim Cook at all, there is a difference between a corporation donating to an incumbent government that seems unusually receptive to bribes (including to be left alone) and an individual CEO being the main financial backer of a local fringe far right party he wants to make a national force, presumably because of his enthusiastic support for their policies which include the 'remigration' of citizens deemed excessively brown...

You’re doing the “we should improve society somewhat” meme guy thing. People are allowed to do better without being perfect.

[deleted]

I imagine that if a company really denied a customer due to disagreement on some views there would be similar flood of comments like "my views is my problem, I pay you money you must do business with me". Maybe I'm wrong though

What are you trying to say with this? This is absurd. The outrage has nothing to do with Mullvad itself supporting people with certain opinions or not. The problem I and many others have, is that if the founder takes our money and gives it to causes that I (edit: or rather we) find reprehensible, we don't want to give them our money anymore. Simple as that. I will not try to stop you from using Mullvad by any other means than my arguments. Hopefully you understand now where we are coming from and agree. If not, just do your thing.

It's almost like there's a difference between selling services to someone and directly donating to a political party.

How do you feel about providing value to Hacker News, a plattform made by Y Combinator funding several startups, many of them destroying our society and benefiting from mass surveillance? You can do this argument with every company.

We can easier look at conclusion people make about banks and stock options. Will people invest money into index fonds and pension fonds if those fonds invest money into companies that produce and sell weapons to abhorred brutal dictators? What about buying stocks from telecommunication producers who operate in abhorred brutal dictatorships and who helps those dictators to control their population?

A thought experiment: Let's think of the other extreme as well: exactly the same excellent VPN service, is run by an almost-the-best-person-in-the-world who has just one small quirk that makes them not 100% perfect for you (they pat kittens not as often as you'd like them to do). Obviously there is a border between your extreme and mine, which border defines "use" and "no use" cases for you. And now: wherever this border is - should it be the same for everyone?

[deleted]

Next iteration of this smear article: “Mullvad is basically HitlerVPN”

Sounds like a branch of the Technocracy movement which Musks grandfather helped found. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joshua_N._Haldeman "The technocracy movement proposed replacing partisan politicians and business people with scientists and engineers who had the technical expertise to manage the economy"

This is just a rephrasing of the lumpenproletariat, coupled with the professional-managerial class. You could also refer to the latter as a modern version of the lumpenbourgeoisie (although this term is applied rather broadly). It sounds more like pro-labor, pro-work, anti-lumpen Marxism. In no way “right-wing” unless you want to call North Korea “right-wing”, which is a very ultra-left thing to do (what orthodox Marxists call left deviationism).

By your logic USSR was far right.

This is actually very far left, just not the current wealthy-urban-lgbtq far left. USSR marxists and Maoists held the same views, where the individual's main function was to work and refusal to work or low productivity required either reformation (aka often, Gulag) or hunger. "Those how do not work, do not eat" - Mao Interestingly, psychoanalysis in the USSR was aimed at helping the patient to go back to work, for instance.

Marxism, communism and socialism are all extreme far-left ideologies. Being anti-immigration doesn't automatically swing the party to the right. As written on Wikipedia, "left-conservative" is probably the best label. The Swedish far-left loves to, for instance, brand the governing party in Denmark as far-right, but they are actually also left-conservative. It is possible (shocker) to be liberal and progressive, whilst also being pro-assimilation, pro-deportation, anti-immigration.

Try radical populist left-economic-leaning nationalists

There are many flavors of national socialism, in reality nazis should be called hitlerians because of this.

>they're pro-ethnical cleansing of people already living there source?

People living there that should not be living there. It was basically an invasion.

Exactly, the problem is not left/right it's the authoritarianism, which is again a huge threat to the world after being held mostly in check in Western democracies for many years. People tend to forget about the "Last Man" part of Fukuyama's "The End of History and the Last Man", but we are definitely in the phase of the Last Man seeking conflict and fighting against our hard-won freedoms.

I matters because a lot of people will only read the headline and then get a skewed view of the political landscape. I did not post my comment to defend him or the party. All I wanted was for people to understand the situation a bit better than they would by just reading the title and post content.

That's not at all what they want. It's comments like yours that create unnecessary controversy, based on nothing but lies.

Most people agree that immigration over X% amount is undesirable. Many governments ignored people's will for many years. Some new political parties want to fix that, is reasonable enough.

>The point is, they want to round up lawful citizens and turf them out of the country The US isn't the only country in the world. Sweden does not have birthright citizenship. Many (most?) of those to be remigrated are not Swedish citizens.

Maybe the issue is that mapping political ideologies onto a 1-D line doesn't work if you have more than two distinct ideologies.

They are very pro education. But that's basically the only thing, all the other answers are enthusiastic right wing answers

[deleted]

> Extremely left wing dental care is the best I will give them. Free dental care is considered "extemely left wing" now? That's just bizarre tbh. If a country would decide to use tax money to provide health care services for free to everybody that's not much different than using tax money to maintain an infrastructure network that's free to use (like roads), or free police and firefighting services - and I think none of those examples are considered particularly 'left-wing'.

What about more social housing, reductions in working hours, and opposition to privatisation? Sounds left wing to me. They have been called Marxist-Lenninist by more mainstream politicians: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C3%96rebro_Party#2021_bus_rap...