AI Profiling: Kalle Grünthal

The political position is staunchly and firmly oppositional, framed as a fight for the freedom and constitutional order of the Estonian people against the government's "dictatorial" and "Stalinist" actions. The policy primarily focuses on criticizing tax hikes (especially the car tax), economic incompetence, and the surrender of sovereignty, emphasizing the need to protect national interests from EU overregulation and globalist mandates. The stance is characterized by forceful, values-driven, and results-oriented rhetoric, which accuses the government of corruption, acting as a tool of the deep state, and steering the country toward a totalitarian or surveillance society.

The core of the politician's expertise lies in constitutional law and procedural norms, which he demonstrates through repeated and detailed references to specific articles of the Constitution, the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act, and criminal law terminology. In addition to this legal depth, he possesses specific and technical knowledge in the fields of public health (vaccines, infrasound, WHO guidelines) and environmental regulation (wind farms, the Ambient Air Protection Act), where he frequently presents claims that are detailed but often controversial. He supports his arguments by citing concrete legal paragraphs, scientific studies, patent specifications, and authoritative sources (the Chancellor of Justice, ECHR judgments), focusing on highlighting procedural and technical shortcomings. The politician also exhibits knowledge of national defense, geopolitics, and the technical issues of IT systems, utilizing both sociological theories and personal practical experience in his argumentation.

The speaker employs a rhetorical style that is consistently and intensely combative, confrontational, and accusatory. This approach is characterized by extreme urgency and a tendency to frame political debate through heavy personalization. The rhetoric skillfully blends strong emotional appeals and populist calls to the public (strikes, resistance) with detailed, formal legal and procedural argumentation, while consistently accusing the opposing side of lawbreaking and deceit. The language is notably sharp, featuring constant sarcasm, irony, and harsh personal attacks (e.g., "dictator," "mafia," "Sandbox Barbie," "narcissistic personality disorder"). To emphasize the dramatic nature of the situation, the speaker frequently draws historical parallels to totalitarian regimes (Stalinism, NKVD, Gestapo) and uses extreme metaphors ("cancer," "digital concentration camp," "tactical nuclear bomb").

The politician's pattern of activity is exceptionally intense and consistent, focusing on almost daily participation in Riigikogu sessions throughout the entire observed period. His activity is strongly oppositional, manifesting in repeated procedural disputes regarding the legality of the session chairman's decisions, the submission of numerous questions to ministers, and the defense of bills he has initiated (e.g., the Hunting Act, the Penal Code). In addition to intensive floor work, the speaker actively gathers information from extra-parliamentary sources, meeting with official authorities (e.g., the Health Board) and interest groups (entrepreneurs, reservists), utilizing these experiences for government oversight and to bolster his arguments.

The confrontation is constantly directed at the ruling coalition (Reform Party, Social Democrats) and the prime ministers (Kallas, Michal), as well as the Riigikogu board (Hussar), who are accused of systematically violating the constitution and procedural rules ("steamroller tactics"). The criticism is simultaneously political (tax hikes, destruction of the economy), procedural, and personal/ethical, accusing opponents of lying, corruption, and criminal activity. In addition to the government, the criticism also extends to the "deep state" and officials (the Prosecutor's Office, police leadership) for repressing political opponents and engaging in unconstitutional activities. The attacks are invariably intense, utilizing extreme language ("mafia," "dictators"), and compromise is completely ruled out, with demands for opponents to resign and be held accountable.

The speaker's collaborative style is predominantly confrontational and uncompromising toward the government and the Riigikogu Board, focusing on legally challenging the opposing side's actions and demanding accountability. He/She engages in consistent and close cooperation with opposition colleagues (EKRE, Isamaa) when initiating bills and challenging procedural rules, mutually supporting procedural motions. A willingness to compromise with the coalition is absent; instead, the speaker prefers strict adherence to rules and appeals to the conscience of coalition members. Also notable is the active cooperation with extra-parliamentary groups and experts (scientists, reservists, citizens) to bring the demands of the people into the Riigikogu.

While the politician’s regional focus primarily serves to illustrate national and international themes, two persistent and specific geographical and thematic focal points consistently emerge. Repeated and intense attention is directed at the negative impact of wind farms (especially in Saarde and Järvamaa) on the health and rights of local residents, using these cases to exemplify failed green transition policy. Secondly, emphasis is placed on protecting Ida-Virumaa’s strategic mineral resources (phosphorite) from foreign capital and control by Brussels. Furthermore, the interests of rural residents are consistently defended regarding school network closures, the proposed car tax, and logistical issues, highlighting the socio-economic consequences of regional marginalization.

The politician’s economic platform is defined by an unwavering and consistent opposition to all tax hikes (income, VAT, excise duties, vehicle, and land tax), which are viewed as destructive to public purchasing power, detrimental to business, and stifling the economy. In terms of fiscal policy, strict discipline is stressed, demanding that state spending be focused on domestic needs (defense, reservist pay, and welfare) while sharply criticizing foreign aid, green transition subsidies, and the funding of major infrastructure projects (such as Rail Baltic) as sheer waste. He advocates for protecting the control of Estonia's natural resources and strategic state-owned enterprises from foreign capital, accusing the government of reducing Estonia to a mere source of raw materials. Furthermore, he supports equal regulatory standards across the business sector (e.g., the same requirements for Bolt taxis as for traditional taxis).

The politician’s social profile is strongly ethnonationalist and anti-establishment, centering on the preservation of the Estonian language, opposition to immigration, and the protection of traditional family values, while fiercely opposing progressive concepts such as "social gender." A core theme is the passionate defense of civil liberties and the principles of the rule of law (especially the presumption of innocence and privacy) against state surveillance and repressive measures, which are often likened to "neo-communism" or historical persecution. In the healthcare sector, a deep-seated distrust of institutional medicine prevails, manifested through repeated and extreme warnings about the dangers of mRNA vaccines and demands for the truthful acknowledgment of vaccine injuries. The politician emphasizes the police's loyalty to the people, defends religious sentiments, and employs nationalist rhetoric to mobilize mass resistance against government policies that, in his view, threaten the nation's survival.

The politician's legislative activity is dual-pronged: he is an active initiator of reforms concerning the rule of law and the legal system (including the protection of the presumption of innocence and the criminalization of lying by ministers), as well as the indexing of support for reservists. Furthermore, he is a consistent opponent of the government's tax policy (car tax, excise duties) and constitutional amendments related to national security. A recurring theme is his strict insistence on adherence to the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure, good legislative practice, and constitutionality, using this argument both when defending his own initiatives and when blocking opponents' draft legislation. His focus also includes specific regulatory topics, such as the taxi industry, public health (mRNA vaccines, daylight saving time), and environmental protection (the ban on nanocomponents, regulation of wind turbines).