Agenda Profile: Martin Helme
Inquiry regarding elementary school textbooks (no. 672)
2025-01-27
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
Political Position
The political position is strongly oppositional, focusing its criticism on violations of the Riigikogu’s rules of procedure and constitutional customs, viewing the system as abnormal and a sham. The primary substantive issue is the opposition to the activities of the Ministry of Education and the content of the curricula, particularly the teaching of extreme transgender ideology in schools. The speaker frames their views as value-based, emphasizing the lack of respect and the system's inherent arbitrariness.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates knowledge of the Riigikogu's Rules of Procedure and constitutional interpretation, citing a previous debate and the commented edition of the Constitution. Regarding education, an authoritative yet value-based stance on the nature of science is put forward, accusing the minister of lying about scientific matters. Specific data or statistics are not referenced; the emphasis is instead placed on criticizing the system and the substance.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is extremely combative, aggressive, and accusatory, utilizing strong emotional and disparaging expressions (e.g., "steamrolled," "completely unfit," "mafia mutual protection," "scoundrel"). The speaker's aim is the personal discrediting of opponents and declaring the system abnormal. Emotional and value-based appeals dominate instead of logical arguments.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The data is limited to two speeches delivered on a single day during the debate on an inquiry, which indicates activity in the parliamentary Question and Answer session. There is no data concerning the frequency of appearances, meetings, or travel. The pattern suggests participation in heated debates.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main opponents are the Minister of Education (who is labeled "completely unfit for office") and those responsible for the Riigikogu's rules of procedure. The criticism is intense and covers both procedural violations and personal accusations of lying and incompetence. The speaker refuses to participate in the system's "sham," which precludes any compromise with the opponents.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The willingness to cooperate is absent because the speaker expresses deep distrust toward the current parliamentary system and refuses to contribute to it. Tõnis Lukas's name is mentioned in connection with a previous curriculum program, which suggests a need to clarify the historical context, but does not imply direct cooperation.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is entirely at the national level, addressing the operational procedures of the Riigikogu and the nationwide basic school curriculum. There are no references to local or international topics.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
There is not enough data. The discussions focus exclusively on procedural and social/educational issues.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The speaker categorically opposes the teaching of extreme transgender ideology in basic school, calling it "crap." The social focus is on parental rights and protecting them from the ideology imposed by the Ministry of Education.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is aimed at demanding adherence to the Riigikogu's rules of procedure and constitutional customs, while remaining critical of established arbitrary practices. Essentially, the focus is placed on criticizing the content of existing curricula and the necessity of changing them, adopting an anti-policy stance.
2 Speeches Analyzed