[thu2111]

This is the public face and leader of the company that publicly advertises a certain set of values

Presumably you're arguing they should stop advertising that set of values. But then that'd be used to condemn them as well.

why it is inappropriate for employees of the company to complain about such dubious donations of their CEO

Totally appropriate, just as long as those employees don't mind the CEO telling everyone that their political donations are dubious/questionable, demanding they publicly denounce their spouse, or controlling their private political and charitable donations.

But of course those employees would explode if the CEO even hinted at doing any of those things. One rule for them and another for the boss, likely justified with vague rhetoric about power. But, you can't have it both ways. If employees can demand control over the CEO's life but not vice-versa, then it's the employees who have the power, not the CEO. Yet we all know that's not how companies actually work. Eventually even tech CEOs will realise that, so expect them to get a lot more aggressive against this kind of employee activism in future. It's simply not fair on them, currently.

[tpxl]

Ah yes, employees don't like what their boss is doing, they call him out, and now they have the power, not the boss. They can suddenly set their own hours, raise their pay, steer the products and take vacations whenever they like. What a load of bullshit.

The bosses have the most power and money and therefore deserve the most scrutiny.

[thu2111]

The bosses only have power if they are willing to exercise it in order to fire the people who are 'scrutinising' them. Is that really what these people want?