AI Profiling: Mart Helme

The politician's stance is consistently and intensely oppositional, framed as a struggle for the survival of the nation-state against a corrupt and incompetent government, which is accused of steering the country onto a path of economic and demographic catastrophe. Key issues include opposing tax increases (especially the car tax), blocking mass immigration, protecting the Estonian language and culture, and challenging the legitimacy of the government’s actions and e-elections. The political framework is strongly value- and results-driven, frequently employing extreme rhetoric ("communist coercion," "perverse regime") while demanding transparency and an end to corruption. Over time, the focus intensifies on government corruption scandals (e.g., Nordica), and criticism sharpens regarding the ideological pressure from the European Union ("green madness") and inadequate national defense preparedness, stressing the necessity of having an independent "Plan B" in addition to NATO.

The politician's scope of knowledge is exceptionally wide, extending from a deep understanding of national defense and security (including technical terminology, intelligence analysis, and infrastructure protection) to mastery of detailed constitutional law and the procedural rules of the Riigikogu (Parliament). Consistent authority is also demonstrated on topics related to energy (wind turbine utilization, gas reservoirs), macroeconomics (financial maneuvering by state-owned enterprises, tax systems), and food security. Arguments are systematically supported by concrete numerical data, specific terminology (HIMARS, BRELL, ANTS), and historical parallels, linking political problems with their historical and geopolitical context. The speaker frequently relies on authoritative sources, citing the conclusions of the Supreme Court, the National Audit Office, international organizations (IMF, OECD), and specific foreign experts.

The rhetorical style is pervasively extremely combative, aggressive, and accusatory, characterized by an urgent and alarmist tone, constantly warning of the destruction of the state and catastrophic consequences. The speaker relies predominantly on emotional appeals, such as moral indignation and fear (corruption, security threats), making abundant use of insults, strong epithets ("thief parties," "corrupt bandit gang"), and hyperbole, which place opponents in an immoral and incompetent light. Formality is low, and argumentation is often supported by historical parallels (Stalinism, the Soviet Union, Goebbels) and personal anecdotes, with the aim of demonizing opponents and refusing "civilized debate."

The politician's pattern of activity is extremely intense and consistently focused on the work of the Riigikogu, where he actively participates in almost every session day, submitting interpellations, criticizing the government, and challenging procedural decisions. His activity is high-frequency, especially during sessions, and activities conducted outside of parliament (such as meetings with businessmen or gauging the mood of the rural population) are rare and primarily serve the goal of supporting parliamentary debates. To increase the weight of his arguments, he consistently refers to his previous extensive high-level experience, such as his roles as Minister of the Interior, Ambassador, and negotiator for the withdrawal of Russian forces.

The opposition's primary and consistent target is the Reform Party-led government coalition, especially Prime Ministers Kaja Kallas and Kristen Michal, who are branded a "corrupt regime" and "globalist puppets." The criticism is extremely intense and multi-layered, focusing on both political incompetence (tax hikes, the economy) and moral and procedural violations (corruption, breaking laws, the destruction of parliamentarism). The central accusation is that the opponents' actions are aimed at destroying Estonian statehood and betraying the people, including charges that the justice system (the prosecutor's office, special services) has been politicized and serves the "deep state." The opposition rules out any compromise, demanding the immediate resignation of the government and ministers, and threatening opponents with future criminal prosecution.

The politician's style of cooperation towards the governing coalition is consistently confrontational and uncompromising. Instead of showing a willingness to compromise, they demand the government's resignation or a complete policy overhaul, viewing the coalition as corrupt and incompetent. Cross-party cooperation is limited to abstract calls for "national consensus" on issues such as national defense or the demographic crisis, or tactical attempts to lure individual members of the coalition over to the opposition (e.g., to repeal the car tax). At the same time, cooperation between the opposition factions (Isamaa, Centre Party) is strong and consistent, focusing on joint action, solidarity, and the submission of joint interpellations in their fight against the government.

The politician's regional focus remains consistently critical, zeroing in on the decline of rural areas, population shrinkage, and the complete absence of a coherent government regional policy, citing specific examples from Western Estonia (Pärnu, Saaremaa, Läänemaa) and Ida-Virumaa. He repeatedly stresses the necessity of prioritizing vital local infrastructure projects (Via Baltica, the Haapsalu/Pärnu railways, the Saaremaa permanent link) over Rail Baltic, while simultaneously criticizing the detrimental effect of central government measures (such as the car tax or school closures) on rural life. Over time, the regional issue has become tightly interwoven with national security, highlighting the vulnerability of the border regions in Southern Estonia and Ida-Virumaa and stressing the need to invest in these areas as a crucial security buffer. Although the focus occasionally shifts heavily toward international topics, the viability of rural life, the preservation of the education network, and the issues facing local municipalities (including Tallinn) are consistently presented as prime examples of the state's failed governance.

The politician's economic views are characterized by an unwavering opposition to all tax increases (VAT, car tax, excises), which are deemed "taxation to death"—killing the economy—and a symptom of incompetent fiscal policy. At the same time, he demands that the state budget be filled by taxing investment income and foreign capital. He is a strong advocate for restoring cheap oil shale energy, considering the green transition and renewable energy (especially wind farms) to be a "giant racket" that dismantles the economy and serves to enrich a corrupt inner circle. The speaker sharply criticizes the waste of state funds and corrupt money laundering via gargantuan projects (Rail Baltic, Nordica, aid to Ukraine), stressing the need to prioritize support for poor Estonian residents, domestic businesses, and food security. His economic philosophy centers on lowering the tax burden, reducing state intervention in private property, and increasing transparency in public procurement and expenditures.

The politician’s social profile is staunchly conservative and traditionalist, primarily centered on the existential threat posed by mass immigration (including from aggressor states and Central Asia) to the Estonian nation-state, language, and internal security. Concurrently, they demand the revocation of voting and firearms rights for citizens originating from aggressor states. On moral issues, they fiercely oppose marriage equality and state-funded abortion, framing these topics within the context of the demographic crisis and the defense of the traditional family. They also call for the absolute safeguarding of Estonian-language education and the concept of the national university. While prioritizing national security through stringent migration policies, they simultaneously champion absolute civil liberties, opposing state intervention, ideological censorship, mandatory vaccination, and hate speech legislation, frequently branding the opposing side as adhering to "fascist" or "totalitarian" ideologies.

The politician’s legislative focus is primarily directed toward aggressively opposing government-initiated bills, particularly regarding tax increases (including the car tax) and the state budget. He accuses the government of violating the constitution and procedural rules, and of establishing discretionary law. His central priorities are the abolition of the e-voting system or challenging its constitutionality, and restricting the voting rights of third-country nationals in local elections. Regarding supportive initiatives, he stresses the strengthening of national security (restoring the militarized border guard, defense capability projects) and national identity. A recurring theme is the demand for greater state transparency, establishing civilian control over special services, and investigating corruption and the political bias within the prosecutor’s office.