(TIL Ingvar Kamprad, IKEA's founder, was a part of the pro-nazi Nysvenska party during WW2. If he were from occupied Norway, he would never even have gotten the chance to start IKEA, people didn't buy from quislings. But Sweden was neutral, a very different climate after the war.)
Then we also note that the original article was published by an MBA scheme website, apparently re-writing one of The Economists articles (to generate clicks?).
With regards to your TIL, it's also worth noting that Kamprad's memberships were not public information until 1994 (during a "confessional" letter to IKEA employees), by which IKEA had long become an everyday staple in Sweden. Contrary to what was suggested, the Swedish population in the 1950s didn't see a furniture store owned by a Nazi sympathizer and thought "here is someone I can relate to, take my money!".
How about Knut Hamsun?
> Hamsun was subjected to humiliating clinical psychiatric tests in Oslo, and having been told that he was suffering from "lasting weakened mental capacities", was eventually fined 325,000 kroner after a civil action found him guilty of NS membership. https://www.theguardian.com/books/2009/aug/08/knut-hamsun-ce...
> In later years, studies and inquiries have shown that justice was administered unevenly and—by today's standards—harshly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_purge_in_Norway_after_Wo...
Social Darwinism, including eugenics, was quite socially acceptable until the Nazis made it unpopular by association, and even then many countries (US, Canada, Denmark, Sweden, I forget which one in Latin America that sterilised poor women without telling them, etc.) still continued practising some parts of it for decades after. It only really became accepted as flat out wrong in the developed world what, in the 70s-90s (as an example, Canada's last residential school closed in 1997)?