Jaak Valge: On the future of national conservatism

Jaak Valge, who was recently kicked out of the Conservative People's Party (EKRE) and is now looking to establish a new conservative force in Estonian politics, writes about why his former party finds itself in hopeless opposition and about his vision for the future of Estonian national conservatism.
There have been more questions than answers when it comes to the national conservatives in recent days. Even though efforts have been made at providing answers by all sides.
On June 12, Mart Helme announced, in his characteristically sharp and combative tone, when answering the questions of an ERR journalist, that EKRE have destroyed a network of biased agents the mastermind behind which he believes to have been Jaak Valge.
I do not deny being associated with biased forces as I do not know of any other kind in politics, while I can assure the reader that the only biased forces that had any effect on me where EKRE and those in the party who felt like I did. As concerns hints that EKRE was infiltrated, Mart Helme was among the people who offered me the chance to join EKRE back in the day.
He was joined by [party leader] Martin Helme who has now accused me and those likeminded of attempting to replace "a successful management model of 12 years" by making the party more constructive and less confrontational.
First of all, the success of any management model is measured in results. The latter in turn are reflected in the ability to reach goals. EKRE have spent the past few years in opposition, which the aforementioned management style is fast turning into hopeless opposition. While our Riigikogu group has been hardworking and tenacious, these efforts have not produced results. The 16 MPs just kept banging their heads against the wall.
Role of board reduced to menu choices
Secondly, this "management model" has taken a rapid turn toward authoritarianism in the past year, increasingly clashing with EKRE statutes, according to which it is the board in charge of running the party. However, board meetings spent more time discussing menus for party events than it did politics. Important political decisions were taken by the chairman or the chairman and one of the deputy chairs outside the board. Meanwhile, the board lacked a detailed overview of the party's financials. EKRE leaders aimed their messages in every direction, at journalists, judges and others, instead of taking accurate aim at our opponents. The party had turned on its head Dale Carnegie's suggestion of winning friends and influencing enemies and was pushing away its friends and activating its enemies instead. The deepening of this increasingly confrontational and sect-like trend is reflected also in that while Martin Helme once wished to show the blacks the door, which could have been construed as an anti-immigration stance, he now wants to show it to the whites too. (The Estonian word for white is valge – ed.)
It has been suggested here and there that Silver Kuusik and I delivered the first public blow to the party. However, there is no reason to construe the June 4 press release published in Postimees or the June 6 Delfi article on the fact that Silver Kuusik planned to run for chairman, his proposals for a change of tactics, or indeed my brief social media post to suggest Kuusik's proposals had been brought to Martin Helme's attention as anything of the sort.
It is only natural for a chairman candidate to present their platform to members before elections. It was impossible to do this via in-house channels as the "successful management model" does not offer candidates the chance to address all congress delegates. The public did not interpret this information as a major schism in the party either. While the media has been hungry for any bad news out of EKRE, these messages went largely ignored – initially.
The process that really hurt EKRE's reputation started on the morning of June 9 on the "Räägime asjast" radio talk show where Martin and Mart Helme leveled, openly referencing the Postimees press release, accusations against Kuusik, myself and Henn Põlluaas. The tone was very different from Kuusik's earlier messages to leave the audience no doubt that according to the Helme family, we had gone down a base and dirty path to dismantle the party and betray conservative values. That is when the public started seeing processes inside EKRE as a wider conflict. On June 12, Martin Helme followed this with an offensive and deterrent social media broadside, which while not exactly substantial upon closer look, is so aggressive (or panicky?) as not to be repeated here. Suffice to say that it is this propagandistically rich but removed from reality and devoid of any substance style of communication which worried many members of the party.
Helmes' talk of EKRE's Soinification demagogy
Taking the authoritarian path is one way to exercise whichever political ideology. But claiming that every alternative to in-house authoritarianism automatically constitutes going soft or the Soinification of EKRE (points to True Finns co-founder Timo Soini – ed.), which is just what the Helme camp has been doing, is demagogy pure and simple.
We made our proposals wishing for EKRE and national conservatism as a whole to find a surer political and social footing and weight that might help us go from words to achieving our goals – retaining our values and principles while changing our tactics in representing them.
I fully stand by the principles I have supported in the past and will not be making any concessions. The best way to represent the conservative worldview is by personal example, by being honest in one's actions and words, consistently and with dignity. And by being polite. I consider equally misguided mandatory political correctness and shouting just for the sake of confrontation. The aggressive manner of speaking characteristic of the Helmes is not characteristic of conservative politics. Suggestions that it is this style of communication that determines one's anti-globalist stance cannot be taken seriously.
Even though peculiar accusations keep trickling in from the direction of the Helmes, I will not be lingering on them further. It is more practical to concentrate on the future.
Other parties' voters still part of our people
I consider national togetherness and true democracy, as opposed to the liberal democrats' variant of it, to be in Estonia's interests. Estonia, as the only state the Estonians have, must remain a nation state. I also believe that it is in Estonia's interest to value and consider every Estonian. People who see things differently or vote for other parties are still a part of our nation. And while their representatives in the Riigikogu and elsewhere may be our political competitors, it is our business to convince them to support the national conservative worldview. We must not consider them enemies or adversaries. We can only survive together.
Today, I see immigration as the number one problem and threat for our nation state. In the interests of surviving as a nation, we have no choice but to limit immigration immediately. Estonians cannot accept into their society an unlimited number of others.
Estonian families want to grow and support the birth rate. The national conservatives believe it is the state's primary duty to help them do just that.
We must respect other nations who have already permanently settled here if their identity is Estonian in words and actions and they respect our nation state. Because that makes them part of the Estonian people.
Important principled matters need to be decided by the people as a whole. Democratic administration must be based on referendums and public initiative. Hijacking the power that belongs to the Estonian people in whichever way or following whichever pretext for the benefit of pseudo-democracy or international alliances is inadmissible. Democracy can only be a tool in the direct service of the power and will of the people.
Referendum needed to specify concept of marriage
Legal regulation of complicated matters, such as the definition of marriage and abortion, can objectively be solved by consulting the entire nation. I still believe it would be right to hold a referendum on the concept of marriage. Trust between state authority and the people must be mutual. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and free speech must not be curtailed, while it is not fair to favor certain minorities over others in legal norms unless it is something the people have decided together.
The state of the natural environment in Estonia is also worrying. Estonian forests need protecting, and national conservatism must include national conservative conservation or green nationalism, which does not rely on green transition slogans but rather draws from the love one has for the nature of one's home country. Attempts to boost logging volumes through whichever excuses and tricks bear testimony to continued robber-capitalism in Estonia. Cut down, our forests provide short-term alleviation to the financial problems of the few, while growing and lasting, they are a resource of the whole nation state.
Estonia's place in the European Union is justified only as long as the benefits it provides outweigh the damage done to our sovereignty by encroaching European federalization and our values being dictated from the outside. Estonia belonging to NATO is unavoidable in the current security situation.
Estonia must not become a convenient destination for Ukrainian adventurers
Russian chauvinism is an existential threat for Estonia, one we must reckon with and must not justify or support, much less admire in any context. But it is critically important for our nation not to be dragged into war. Next to forcefully developing our national defense, we need to keep our nerve and dignified balance, which includes not offering provocation, while meeting the other side's provocations or attacks steadfastly and proportionally.
Finally, Ukraine. The Ukrainians must be the masters of their country's fate, and we respect Ukraine's decisions. The families of Ukrainian soldiers should be allowed to come to Estonia and supported, while we must take care not to turn Estonia into a convenient destination for Ukrainian adventurers, less so deserters, to make sure immigration does not threaten our constitutional goals.
In all other aspects of national or political importance, which I did not have time to cover here, I consider it proper to proceed from the Estonian Constitution and prioritizing the sovereignty of the Estonian nation state.
What I have described are the personal convictions of yours truly as a founding group member of the Estonian Nationalists and Conservatives (ERK) party. The values and positions of the party's program will be decided by its founding congress to be held in Tartu on July 29.
--
Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!
Editor: Marcus Turovski