Of course. It seems that one of the foundational truths of antifascism is the approach that fascism, operates in all tenets of life, not just on the debate floor, and so if one resigns themselves to only confronting fascism using the establishes channels (i.e. voting), they are "leaving the back door open", so to speak.

This leads to a certain suspicion toward all things; for example, not accepting trump's dismissal of project 2025, because it is a forgone conclusion that lying about something that is exactly something a fascist would do.

However, I think that worldview can complicate (and at times create tension with) other discussions, i.e. Proton. Someone who may not consider themselves fascist or antifascist, and just wants to degoogle, may look up Proton and feel as if they don't have the tools to separate the stuff which isn't in the scope of their inquiry from the stuff that does, which what I think is going on here.

To put it another way, it's like someone saying they want a burger and asking if mcdonald's is good, then being told that mcdonald's sucks because their food is unhealthy, they facilitate factory farming, and they take advantage of the economically disadvantaged. While those data points are important to the person sharing their opinion, and may very well extend to the life of the individual asking, it doesn't say anything about whether the food tastes good or not, thereby leaving the initial question unresolved.

So while the data points about proton's CEO (and anyone else who may be implicated) may be true, and while there may be wider implications as well, it can serve to muddy the waters for those who are coming in perpendicular to the conversation.