AI Profiling: Helle-Moonika Helme

The political position has been intensely conservative and national throughout the entire observed period, remaining unwaveringly opposed to the government's economic and ideological policies. The central criticism is centered on tax increases (especially the car tax), opposition to the green transition, and the defense of Estonian nation-statehood and traditional values against mass immigration and social liberalism. The framework of this position is strongly value- and results-based, consistently accusing the government of incompetence, corruption, and violating the constitutional order, which, they argue, leads to economic decline and totalitarian tendencies. In 2025, the focus intensified on the government's lack of legitimacy, and the necessity of aligning Estonian politics with conservative trends in the USA was emphasized.

The politician's knowledge consistently focuses on three main areas: the details of education policy (inclusive education, Estonian-language instruction), the technical and financial mechanisms of the energy sector (desynchronization, CO2 price), and fiscal policy (tax hikes, budget deficit). Expertise is also demonstrated in matters of infrastructure (Rail Baltic, road maintenance backlog) and the social sector (immigration, healthcare), where arguments are consistently supported by specific statistical data, financial indicators, and references to State Audit Office reports or scientific studies. In addition to this substantive knowledge, his deep competence in the Riigikogu (Parliament) rules of procedure and constitutional principles is notable, particularly regarding the inviolability of property and the supreme power of the people, which is strategically employed when criticizing legislation.

The politician's rhetorical style throughout the entire observation period is extremely combative, confrontational, and accusatory, focusing on exposing the government's incompetence, corruption, and immorality. The style is populist and direct, consistently employing strong emotional appeals, dramatic labeling ("liberal terror," "crime against humanity"), and historical parallels with totalitarian regimes. Although logical facts and statistics are also used in the argumentation, the discourse is dominated by rhetorical questions, irony, and sarcasm, aimed at ridiculing opponents and appealing to the public's sense of justice.

The politician's pattern of activity throughout the observed period has been extremely intense and regular, with frequent appearances almost every Riigikogu session day, both during information hours and in debates on draft legislation. His/her activity is distinctly oppositional, focusing on sharp and consistent criticism of government policies, actively utilizing interpellations and procedural questions to achieve this. Especially in 2024, his/her actions were characterized by systematic obstruction tactics (e.g., demanding 10-minute recesses and votes on amendments), which hindered the processing of controversial bills (the car tax, e-elections). In addition to parliamentary debates, he/she also participates in the substantive work of the faction (working groups, initiating interpellations) and occasionally demonstrates an international focus.

The opposition's posture was persistently and intensely directed against the Reform Party-led government and Prime Minister Kaja Kallas, extending also to coalition partners and specific ministers. The criticism was broad, encompassing both political decisions (tax hikes, the green transition, damage to the economy) and procedural violations (disregard for the constitution, lack of transparency). The sharpest attacks focused on the personal and moral level, accusing opponents of systemic corruption, misappropriation of state funds, unethical conduct, and even actions bordering on treason. The opposition's position was invariably uncompromising, constantly demanding the government's resignation and accountability, often labeling the opposing side as "liberal terrorists" or "enemies of the Estonian state."

The speaker’s style of cooperation is strictly oppositional and uncompromising, focusing on internal factional unity and supporting other opposition parties when submitting joint legislative proposals and inquiries. Cooperation is also directed towards ideological allies outside of Estonia and civil society organizations, but explicitly excludes the governing coalition. Communication with the governing coalition is consistently confrontational, accusatory, and aimed at obstructing the government's work through procedural means. Openness to cross-party cooperation or compromise is almost entirely absent, with the speaker instead demanding that the government freeze its activities or resign.

The politician’s regional focus is consistently strong and centers on the fight against rural decline, emphasizing in particular the threat of closing rural schools and the discriminatory impact of the car tax on the freedom of movement for rural residents. Geographically, attention is drawn to South Estonia (Võrumaa, Nursipalu) and West Estonia/the islands (Hiiumaa, Läänemaa), where criticism is leveled at both national budget cuts and large-scale projects that threaten local sovereignty (wind farms, military training areas). Regional themes are the main prism through which national tax, education, and energy policies are criticized, while simultaneously demanding the development of local infrastructure (the Haapsalu railway, four-lane roads) at the expense of the Rail Baltic project.

The politician's economic views are strongly fiscally conservative and pro-market, making him a fierce opponent of absolutely all tax increases, especially consumption taxes (VAT, car tax) and new ideological taxes. He argues that these measures impoverish the populace and stifle economic growth. He demands a drastic reduction in state spending, particularly concerning ideological mega-projects (the green transition, Rail Baltic) and foreign aid, viewing them as corrupt waste, and supports redirecting funds toward domestic needs and ensuring national security. In energy policy, he advocates for cheap and stable oil shale energy, criticizing the green transition policy as economically damaging ideological interference and corrupt market distortion. Overall, his focus is on lowering the tax burden (including VAT on foodstuffs) and restoring fair market competition to improve both the business environment and people's livelihoods.

The politician's socio-political profile is consistently extremely conservative and nationalistic, focusing on the defense of the Estonian nation-state and the traditional family model. The speaker is consistently and vehemently opposed to all forms of gender ideology, the LGBT+ agenda, and marriage equality, viewing them as abnormalities and values imposed by "globalists," while emphasizing that there are only two sexes (male and female). In education and language policy, they advocate for Estonian-language education and national identity, while simultaneously criticizing inclusive education and demanding stricter control over immigration, which is viewed as a threat of demographic replacement and internal security. Furthermore, individual rights are defended against mandatory vaccination, consent laws, and the legalization of euthanasia, while simultaneously stressing the protection of children and the elderly in the context of social security crises (abortions, nursing home abuse).

The speaker's legislative activity is primarily focused on intensely opposing bills initiated by the government, particularly those concerning tax hikes (including the car tax) and regulatory expansions (energy, EU directives, gender balance quotas). His own priorities center on national-conservative themes, such as tax reduction (VAT on food), supporting family policy, and restricting suffrage exclusively to Estonian citizens, viewing this as a matter of national security. To scrutinize the government's actions, he systematically employs all parliamentary mechanisms, including interpellations, motions of no confidence, and demands for investigative committees, repeatedly calling into question the constitutionality of e-voting and proposed legislation. His activity is consistently characterized by the use of obstruction against the government's legislative "steamroller" and sharp criticism of the Riigikogu's procedural and organizational matters.