If you want an example of general ban against discrimination you can look to the European Convention on Human Rights, in particular Article 10, 11 and 14.

Political affiliation, political views, political association, all those are protected.

The state can step in if it is in the interests of national security or to preventing of crime, but it is just as wrong to discriminate someone who identify as a feminist as someone who identifies themselves as a racist.

It should also be noted that where I live, Sweden, the right of political association is particularly cemented in our constitution. The same protection that is given union members are given to political members, including racist political groups. People talk about changing the constitution whenever neo-nazists goes around and demonstrate, but that kind of talk usually dies down when people realize that life goes on even if a handful of people believe in something which the rest of the nation consider crazy.

The right of political association is different from nondiscrimination. Are you suggesting it would be illegal for me to kick a nazi out of my store because they are being a nazi? Because that's the right we're talking about, my right to discriminate against you.

It appears that you're conflating government nondiscrimination with government mandates on individual nondiscrimination. Those aren't equivalent.

> it would be illegal for me to kick a nazi out of my store because they are being a nazi

Here in Sweden, yes. The law is very clear that you can not deny service because you disagree with someones political, religious, or world views.

Government nondiscrimination is a US technicality of the first amendment. European Convention on Human Rights is not limiting to government behavior. Everyone has to follow it.

Then Sweden has a unique interpretation of the ECHR. In most EU nations, that isn't the case (nor does it seem to actually be the case in Sweden, given that Sweden's anti discrimination law doesn't protect arbitrary views).

I think you should speak with a lawyer, because you're not correct.

In 2016 the Swedish national cabinet issued a report on the status of the anti-discrimination law (SOU 2016:87). It cites the EU courts cases C-399/11, Melloni and C‑617/10, Åklagaren mot Åkerberg Fransson, and the conclusion that political discrimination is against the human rights convention.

The report also note that current law does not protect children that get discriminated based on their parents political activity, which the FN convention of children rights says they should be protected against.

The report goes on to basically say that the EU convention of human rights extends the Swedish anti-discrimination law to include, among other things, political and other world views, class, and social status. The report then goes on that courts must already follow those extensions.

There were also a specific case a couple years ago where a politician was kicked out of a restaurants based on his political affiliation. A Judge commented on that case noted that while the Swedish anti-discrimination does not make it illegal, there is a case to be made under the EU human rights declaration.

So there. The government report, and a judge, both saying the same conclusion.