Agenda Profile: Anti Poolamets
First Reading of the Draft Resolution of the Riigikogu "Making a Proposal to the Government of the Republic for Amending the Basic Schools and Upper Secondary Schools Act" (279 OE)
2024-04-03
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
Political Position
The political position is strongly value-based, focusing on the protection of the nation-state and Estonian national sentiment, while sharply opposing the government's multicultural direction, which is labeled a dystopia. The speaker is firmly against the government's education policy, particularly concerning the linguistic and cultural preservation of Ukrainian refugees, accusing the government of exacerbating Ukraine's demographic catastrophe. He emphasizes that the state cannot endure if the foundation—national identity—is absent.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in language policy and the history of education, citing specific data regarding shifts in the proportion of Russian-language versus Ukrainian-language instruction in Ukraine between 1991 and 2004. Demographic forecasts are also used, and the speaker references Wall Street Journal data concerning the potential decline of Ukraine's population. He/She stresses the importance of preserving literary and scientific Ukrainian while in exile.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is extremely combative, accusatory, and emotional, employing powerful metaphors (e.g., a house without a foundation, dystopia) and historical parallels (Lenin, Soviet internationalism). The speaker focuses on attacking the motives and character of opponents, accusing them of mental confusion and waging a war against the nation-state. He/She uses numerous rhetorical questions and expresses moral outrage.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker requested three minutes of extra time during the session, which suggests a desire to present their views thoroughly. They mention their previous trip to Ukraine, where they saw the statue of Taras Shevchenko, using it as a symbol of the destruction of cultural heritage. There are no other patterns of activity.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary adversaries are the governing coalition, specifically the Prime Minister and the Social Democrats (Ossinovski). They are accused of acting against the interests of the nation-state and having ties to Russian money. The criticism leveled against them is intense, personal, and ideological, focusing heavily on the opponents' mental state and their perceived lack of national sentiment. Furthermore, the speaker accuses the coalition of failing to grasp the significance of the Ukrainian struggle and, in doing so, causing significant harm.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
There is not enough data. The speech was entirely focused on sharp criticism of the government and the Social Democrats, pointing to a clear ideological chasm.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is strongly national and international, centering on the defense of the Estonian nation-state, the situation of Ukrainian war refugees, and the preservation of their language. Mention is made of the global movement of over 6 million Ukrainians and the potential reduction in Ukraine's population.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
There is not enough information. Economic issues are only touched upon indirectly, accusing all coalition parties of ties to Russian money and a lack of effort to emerge from the shadows.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The speaker vehemently emphasizes national identity and the preservation of cultural heritage, sharply opposing multiculturalism and the creation of a new "rainbow-colored" entity. He criticizes the education policy that forces Ukrainian children into Russian schools, viewing this as an obstruction to national rebirth. Social issues are framed within the context of national survival and language preservation.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on the draft bill amending the Basic Schools and Upper Secondary Schools Act (279 OE), which the speaker is a fierce opponent of. The goal is to prevent policies that, in his estimation, co-opt Ukrainians and exacerbate their language loss, all while failing to support the Ukrainian e-school and teachers. He finds that the current situation is unfair to the Ukrainian people.
2 Speeches Analyzed