By Months: Marko Mihkelson
Total Months: 10
Fully Profiled: 10
05.2025
1 Speeches
The rhetorical style is formal and professional, addressing the Vice-Chairman of the Riigikogu respectfully. The speech is brief and focuses exclusively on conveying information, explaining the background of the amendment and the procedural process without emotional or persuasive appeals.
03.2025
4 Speeches
The rhetorical style is highly formal and procedural, focusing on logical argumentation and the precise description of procedural details. The tone is explanatory and authoritative, addressing objections (Urmas Reinsalu) with legal justifications, and emphasizing the relevance of the constitution and the explanatory memorandum. Emotional appeals are not employed; the emphasis is placed on facts and legislative correctness.
02.2025
8 Speeches
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and extremely forceful, emphasizing the seriousness of the existential threat and the need to avoid historical mistakes. The speaker uses logical arguments and historical examples to justify the need for swift and fundamental security decisions, also citing the director of British foreign intelligence (MI6) and a former US president.
01.2025
10 Speeches
The style is formal and analytical, beginning with the facilitation of commission procedures, but becoming pressing and emotionally charged during the debate. Strong historical parallels are employed (the June 1940 elections in Estonia, the 1921 Soviet invasion of Georgia) to underscore the gravity of the situation. The broader security context is emphasized to justify the importance of adopting the statement.
10.2024
2 Speeches
The speech is formal, serious, and emphasizes the moral urgency and significance of the topic, referring to it as "an extremely important and necessary step." The style is balanced, combining emotional appeals (acknowledging suffering) with logical arguments (historical precedent, establishing a legal framework). Respectful parliamentary language is used ("Esteemed Chair of the Session! Dear colleagues!") and consensus is emphasized.
06.2024
3 Speeches
The style is formal and professional, especially when reporting on procedural decisions and the work of the committee, utilizing extensive procedural language (e.g., "by consensus," "lead committee," "final vote"). The tone is supportive and positive, emphasizing the importance of the draft legislation and the consensus achieved. The speaker employs logical appeals to justify the length of the procedure and the rationality of the solutions found.
05.2024
4 Speeches
The rhetorical style is formal and insistent, emphasizing the speed and importance of action to avoid a "very, very slow" reaction. It employs both logical arguments (precedents, constitutionality) and a strong emotional appeal, linking support for the draft legislation directly to the survival and security of the Estonian state. Criticism aimed at opponents is sharp, implying that criticizing the bill amounts to criticizing the Estonian state itself.
03.2024
1 Speeches
The rhetorical style is highly formal, neutral, and procedural, focusing on the detailed presentation of facts and the course of proceedings. The speaker frequently references consensus and commission decisions, thereby conveying an accountable and businesslike tone. Emotional appeals are absent, with the emphasis placed on logical and chronological reporting.
02.2024
9 Speeches
The rhetorical style is extremely serious, urgent, and alarmist, emphasizing that the world is "on the verge of a global catastrophe" and we are living "in the midst of world-changing wars." Many logical arguments and historical context are used to substantiate the danger inherent in Western hesitation. The style is formal and includes strong metaphors, for example, referring to Russia's actions as "evil" and Western fear as "water for the enemies' mill."
01.2024
1 Speeches
The speech is extremely formal, polite, and procedural, utilizing salutations such as "Esteemed Speaker of the Riigikogu! Dear colleagues!" The style is neutral and focuses solely on conveying information regarding the submission of the draft decision for deliberation, avoiding emotional or polemical appeals.