AI Profiling: Martin Helme

The political position throughout the entire observed period has been fiercely oppositional toward the governments led by the Reform Party, accusing them of posing an existential threat to the Estonian state. The criticism is predominantly value- and performance-based, centering on three main thematic pillars: the destruction of the economy through tax hikes and the green transition; the dismantling of the nation-state via mass immigration and the promotion of left-wing ideologies (e.g., trans ideology); and government corruption and incompetence. The political framework remains consistently aggressive, emphasizing the defense of the constitution and democratic institutions against the government’s "totalitarian whims" and the "coup d’état of the establishment."

The politician's expertise is exceptionally strong and consistent in the field of economics and finance, where he demonstrates detailed knowledge of the state budget, taxation (VAT, excise duties, income tax wedge), and macroeconomic indicators (inflation, GDP decline, deficit), often relying on his previous experience as Minister of Finance. Another important area of authority is the Riigikogu (Parliament) Rules of Procedure, procedural rules, and constitutional law, which he systematically uses to criticize the legal aspects of parliamentary work and e-elections. A characteristic feature of the speaker is the continuous and detailed use of statistics and specific figures (billions, percentages, number of weapon systems) on topics ranging from the economy and energy (the cost of the green transition) to national defense, often presenting alternative calculations and challenging official data. In addition to economics, he demonstrates a deep awareness of energy policy, internal security, and defense capabilities, utilizing technical terminology and references to specific legal provisions.

The rhetorical style throughout the entire period under review (2024–2025) is exclusively combative, aggressive, and extremely confrontational, with the aim of completely discrediting opponents morally and politically. The speaker relies primarily on emotional appeals, hyperbole, and an alarmist tone, constantly emphasizing national crisis, bankruptcy, and the death of democracy, employing aggressive labeling and personal attacks instead of detailed analysis. The style is characterized by the repeated and systematic use of extreme metaphors (e.g., "mafia," "pedophile mafia," "rotten egg") and ideological parallels (Communism, Putinism, a Goebbelsian scale), with the main accusations revolving around "lying" and "corruption."

The politician’s pattern of activity is exceptionally intense and consistent, focusing almost exclusively on the work of the Riigikogu plenary session, where he actively speaks on nearly every session day throughout the entire observed period. His activity is clearly oppositional, encompassing both the submission of substantive draft legislation (tax cuts) and the systematic use of procedural tactics, such as requesting recesses, changing the agenda, and challenging the decisions made by the Riigikogu Board. He has repeatedly been involved in initiating and supporting motions of no confidence and is constantly active during Question Time, submitting pointed inquiries to members of the government. The overall rhythm is demanding and centered on continuously challenging the government's actions from the parliamentary rostrum, utilizing all available parliamentary tools to the maximum extent.

The opposition's confrontation with the ruling coalition, particularly the Reform Party and its leaders (Kaja Kallas, Kristen Michal), is consistently intense and uncompromising. The criticism is comprehensive, encompassing both political choices (tax hikes, economic destruction, the green transition) and procedural violations. However, ethical and personal attacks dominate, accusing opponents of systematic lying, corruption, and incompetence. Extreme labels are frequently used in these attacks ("Estophobes," "Putinists," "mafioso"), emphasizing that the government serves narrow vested interests at the expense of the nation-state. A willingness to compromise is consistently ruled out, as the opposition's goal is the swift resignation of the government and the complete reversal of its policies.

The speaker's cooperation style is strongly faction-centric, focusing on coordinating obstruction and the initiation of draft legislation primarily with their faction colleagues. Cooperation with other opposition forces does exist, but it is predominantly tactical, centered around submitting joint motions of no confidence and specific bills (e.g., tax reductions). Communication with the governing coalition is consistently confrontational, accusatory, and uncompromising, emphasizing ideological opposition and the necessity of reversing the government's actions. The willingness to compromise is low, with the exception of rare conditional offers made to the government to support EKRE's ideological objectives or the occasional search for consensus on technical matters.

The politician’s regional focus is primarily instrumental, utilizing local issues (such as the closure of rural schools or the impact of the car tax on residents of the countryside) to illustrate the government’s neglect and cuts in regional policy. The central regional theme is the demand for developing domestic infrastructure (four-lane highways, the Saaremaa bridge) in opposition to Rail Baltic, alongside addressing the energy security and educational challenges in Ida-Virumaa. Rural areas are framed as victims of national policies (the green transition, taxation), while simultaneously highlighting concerns about the Russification of Estonia and the security of the border state. Specific regional references (e.g., Metsküla, Lihula, Narva, Võru) often function as a means to criticize nationwide issues concerning the rule of law or economic policy.

The politician’s economic views are strongly pro-market and growth-oriented, centered on the radical reduction of the tax burden (VAT, income tax, excise duties) to revitalize the economy and restore people’s purchasing power. He forcefully opposes the government’s tax hikes and the growth of state debt, advocating for fiscal responsibility and budget balancing through massive spending cuts, particularly by reducing funding for Rail Baltic, aid to Ukraine, and green transition subsidies. The green transition and its associated subsidies (€2.6 billion) are sharply criticized as central planning, "green terror," and a corrupt wealth redistribution scheme, with a preference for cheap oil shale energy and nuclear power. As an alternative to tax increases, he supports implementing an extraordinary bank tax on the record profits of foreign capital, while simultaneously opposing the importation of cheap labor, which suppresses wage growth for Estonian residents.

The politician's social profile is consistently and extremely conservative, focusing heavily on the preservation of the nation-state. The most dominant theme is mass immigration, particularly the influx from Slavic countries, which is consistently framed as the Russification of Estonia, the greatest security risk, and the destruction of the nation-state. Consequently, they demand that voting rights be restricted solely to Estonian citizens. Rigid traditionalism prevails in social and family policy, manifesting as categorical opposition to LGBTQ+ ideologies (labeled "perverse" or "left-radical nonsense") and anti-abortion positions, linking liberal values to the demographic crisis and the "culture of death." In addition to a strong focus on security, they consistently defend the fundamental rights of citizens (freedom of religion, speech, and assembly) against the government's totalitarian tendencies, excessive surveillance, and a selectively enforced rule of law.

The politician’s legislative focus is overwhelmingly aggressively oppositional, centered on overturning government policy and providing socioeconomic relief. They are themselves an active initiator of bills proposing tax cuts (VAT, income tax, excise duties) and, specifically, the abolition of the car tax. A central and consistent theme is the defense of the Riigikogu’s rules of procedure, parliamentarianism, and constitutionality, which involves the intensive use of obstruction, motions of no confidence (against several ministers), and demands for improving the quality of lawmaking. A key priority is electoral system reform, encompassing the banning of e-voting, the restriction of voting rights for non-citizens, and the establishment of legal clarity regarding local government election rules.