Writer, cultural scientist, professor, orientalist, columnist and intellectual Rein Raud, 2024 marks two decades since Estonia joined the Europan Union and NATO. Could we take a trip back in time – how did you picture Estonia in 2024 back then? How different was it from the current reality?

If one imagines oneself as a time traveler and tourist just taking a walk here, I'd say the result is just what one might have imagined back then. Perhaps even better in some things.

That's looking from the outside – we have a lot of brilliant new architecture, and it seems that the people in the street are if not more joyful, then definitely no more gloomy than they were back then.

But if one were to buy a newspaper, one would probably be surprised by the problems we are having, what people are talking about and how some of these things have even proved possible. That's how it is – you can never fully imagine the future. Even if everything turns out the way you wanted, the result will still be something else.

Have we become the Europeans we dreamed of becoming?

We like to think so. Whether everyone... but looking at the younger generation, my children and their friends, it seems to me that their worldview and values are quite similar to those of people their age in Germany, Ireland or Portugal.

Looking at gentlemen older than myself, that mentality is perhaps more common in the Balkans or Southern Europe, while the general picture is a little different here.

Where does the age divide run?

I would like to hope it's around my age. We tend to appear like we belong in the same group, and looking at what social media thinks I might be interested in, very few things actually hit the mark.

But it also boils down to working as a teacher where you are in constant contact with students and always have one foot in that ever-renewing world. I believe it is an advantage.

People who have children would do well to speak to them – you learn a lot of interesting things.

We took a look in the past, let us now take one into the future. [Former President] Toomas Hendrik Ilves said in a speech delivered before Independence Day that Estonians have always been a project nation – from the first Song Festival to the Baltic Way and joining NATO, we have always ploughed one furrow at a time. What could be our next national project?

I get the feeling that striving always for a single goal has exhausted its usefulness. Thinking about ourselves as a free people, we must realize that we are multifaceted, have plurality of opinion and it is entirely normal for people to take a completely different view. We should not hold it against them. There is this race for who can define Estonia's narrative – that if we had a single narrative, we could have it apply to everyone and force the rest to shut up and tow the line, which I believe is not right.

I talked to someone I don't know personally and who has very conservative views on social media once, they were quite aggressive, and I told them that I have nothing against their existence, that I want a society where we both fit.

They replied by saying that there will never be enough room for both of us – hinting that I should somehow disappear. I believe that liberal democracy means being who you are but also allowing others to be who they are.

When I asked about how you saw life in 2024 two decades ago, the matter of security came up – that there is more fear and anxiety if one reads the paper today. On the one hand, we are constantly told that Estonia has never been better defended than it is today in connection with NATO presence, and that we have a stable position in the international system, at least more secure than it was during the 13 years that separated restoration of independence from joining NATO. Why is it that we can increasingly read stories about the end of some era or other?

Several things coincide here. First, that Estonia has never been as well defended as it is today is true. Paradoxically, the major tragedy unfolding in Ukraine has shaken people in the West. If we were looking to join NATO right now, we would likely not be accepted because we would constitute yet another nascent problem.

But we already are in NATO, and everyone realizes that should a military conflict happen here and should NATO fail to respond, it would mark the end of the Western alliance as it would mean going back on very serious promises. This scenario is not completely impossible, while I hold it to be very unlikely.

But it would be the end of trust and every man for himself. Our neighbor to the east might consider this a plausible scenario, which is why we need to keep making these points.

It seems that NATO's defense plans for the Baltics have been substantially updated and everyone realizes we cannot just surrender territory to try and take it back later, which was how people believed the Ukraine war would go. That Ukraine would fall first and then there would be an attempt to liberate it. It just wouldn't work. Practical experience has shown such developments are best avoided.

Still, what is that looming end of an era?

As concerns the end of an era, I believe it goes beyond. I also read the speech by Toomas Hendrik Ilves and found several parts of it to my liking. But what he meant by the end of an era was Estonia's rapid development and a very fast golden age between now and the end of the Cold War.

What's ending is an era of many more ideas. For example, how the definition of success has been built on more consumption and economic growth through relatively unhesitating exploitation of natural resources. That we measure the success of countries by whose economy grows the fastest. That era should end simply because those natural resources are about to be exhausted.

It would be sensible to think about our children and grandchildren as our responsibility is not just to the shareholders. We also bear responsibility for future generations. And they are greatly concerned because the planet is on fire and there's seemingly nothing that can be done.

Another thing is that when capitalism first appeared, it constituted sensible projects by active people. The idea was for people to be able to act freely because that would facilitate good ideas and self-realization. This idea of freedom was largely tied to the capitalist business model, while the latter has changed quite a lot since the 18th century or around the time of the French Revolution. It has become very different.

Looking at the so-called free market economy of today, it's not really a market economy because if a major bank messes up, the taxpayer will shoulder the bill. Not all Estonian companies are viable without support from Enterprise Estonia.

Resources being distributed and moving differently does not in itself make a free market. And I think it's okay, because it would be impossible for the national opera to cover the cost of putting on a performance from ticket revenue alone.

I write books, and you could not publish them without support from the Estonian Cultural Endowment. Even if they prove popular among grateful readers, the latter could not afford to buy those books in the conditions of pure market economy. That is just the way it is.

We need to ask ourselves whether the challenges the world faces can be met with the economic model we have, considering that it has already changed.

A metaphor I have used before is if we try to imagine a patient who is constipated and needs to be administered a laxative. If you give them a little laxative, they will feel better but won't yet fully recover. But if the doctor just keeps prescribing more laxative, calling it a universal cure – like the free market will sort everything out – it could all end rather badly.

What does it mean when opinion articles increasingly suggest that if you want peace, you should prepare for war?

That's how it is. We cheer for the Ukrainians in front of our TV screens, say that they are fighting for a common cause, which is absolutely true. But then someone says that a tax rate needs to go up by a percentage point or two as our national defense spending has exploded in connection with helping Ukraine, we also have a host of social programs for Ukrainian refugees and helping them survive this tragic period. Our participation is paying more in the way of certain taxes.

And it is a very-very small price to pay for our freedom – and freedom should not be taken for granted.

Things could be a lot worse, and to make sure they don't become a lot worse, we need to make sure politicians are on the same page and keep their eyes on broader values. We should all be united in this support.

Should we feel afraid?

It is always sensible to feel a little apprehensive. One tends to get hurt if one feels no fear at all. I still look left and right before crossing the road.

I do not consider a direct attack to be very likely, while everything depends on what will happen next. It also depends on who will be elected president in the United States, whether Ukraine will be sent enough weapons, feel it has the support it needs in terms of planes and shells etc. Because should it go ill in Ukraine, twisted minds might conclude that women in Siberia will give birth to more soldiers and that perhaps they should try to conquer something else too.

Philosopher Francis Fukuyama, who wrote a book about the end of history in 1992, which is considered among the most controversial in modern history, is quoted increasingly often lately. When the Cold War was drawing to a close after several decades, Fukuyama basically suggested that the liberal world had won for good. Looking at Russia, China or Iran today, did the esteemed scholar get it wrong?

The idea isn't all that novel. Hegel was the first to phrase it in a meaningful way, suggesting that history is the expression of an idea, how it takes material form and moves toward an increasingly perfect moment, culminating in where the idea is constantly being realized in its purest form in social reality.

And while you might still have debates and conflict, they will no longer be antagonistic, fundamental. Marx adopted the idea, and for him the end of history is called communism where everyone is happy, robots do all the work while the people write symphonies and paint. And since everyone understands that you should only consume what you need, there will be plenty for everyone.

So there are quite a few representatives of this post-historical school of thought. Fukuyama quotes a Hegelian called Alexandre Kojeve (originally Kolezhnikov). But the idea that there is an end-point of social struggle is hardly anything new. People have tried to call it, so to speak, before.

Such things should not be taken too seriously. It was not long after Fukuyama people started asking what to do about Islam; that while the Cold War might be over, we have terrorists and bombs exploding. It was a good idea for a bestseller rather than an astute look at things.

It is little more than a fairy tale where good triumphs over evil. What we are seeing instead, to borrow from football, is liberals and democrats playing against tyrants and dictators, whereas the latter seem to be in the lead while the former are hitting own goals.

I would be cautious here. It is clear that there is an axis of dictatorships where there are hardly any positive developments on the horizon – Putin, the ayatollah, North Korea – while painting the leaders of liberal democracy – Biden, Macron et al. – as white doves would also be an exaggeration.

Among other things, by looking at how much opposition they are facing at home. Macron is falling victim to his own savior image where the old French system was dilapidated but the only initiative came in the form of the Le Pen family's extremely unpleasant ideology. Macron came as neither one or the other, a young and energetic politician with a background in philosophy.

But he has not been too successful in practice, because the problems in those societies go deeper and cannot be solved through a single measure. We are living in an age of deep polarization, and technology has made it very easy for us to only speak to people who agree with us. That is when we encapsulate ourselves, throw up walls, and the others... well, they are fools and it makes no sense to speak to them. That is the tonality [of public debate] today, and it is very difficult.

In a classical system, we could see Isamaa represent traditional conservatism, the Social Democrats more left-wing and social policy, the Reform Party pro-enterprise liberalism. But other voices and initiatives inside those parties have been added, which disrupt the system and make sure the sides fail to come together.

To what extent have you been surprised at how brutal things can be in recent years? I'm speaking in the context of the Ukraine war. Did it come unexpectedly?

Yes, several things happened quite differently from what I had imagined. Trump being elected president, Brexit and the Ukraine war. I would have made different bets, were I the gambling type.

I believe first that they are part of an integral process, because it is quite clear by now that the Trump presidency and Brexit were digitally enhanced from the same place that is currently escalating the conflict in Ukraine.

The axis of dictatorships is playing a long game. It is not a case of a dictator suddenly getting an idea and then acting on the impulse.

I remember a G20 summit, I believe it was, where Putin was insulted. I read somewhere that he left, but before he did, he shook the hand of someone relatively unimportant just to have someone willing to shake his hand. I recall thinking that this would come to haunt the world, even though the situation was entirely justified. I do not remember the conditions exactly. But that he's someone who bears a grudge and will try to visit the insult and humiliation he felt he was handed upon those he deems responsible tenfold.

We have often seen Western Europeans be extremely naive and believe narratives coming from the Kremlin, even if they are pure lies and have no connection to reality. Have Western leaders now understood that Russia continues to be a real threat?

I cannot say, because what we see and hear is meant for the public. It is often the case that the public is not told how things really are because if we said, for example, that there is a fire in the building and everyone still in this room two minutes from now will die, the ensuing chaos would result in a lot more deaths than asking people to stay calm and proceed to the hallway in an orderly fashion. You can save more lives like that.

I could not do something like that. That is why I'm not a politician. I would not be able to make such decisions.

But in terms of what they really think, what they talk about behind closed doors – I very much hope the picture is a bit more realistic there. I'm sure there are also cynics who say, why protect the Ukrainians and Estonians when it would be far more lucrative to deal with Putin.

Are you talking about the U.S. Republicans now?

It has become a matter of public record. Even though there are quite a lot of influential Republicans who disagree.

Is what we are seeing in the U.S. today an attempt to hijack the democratic system?

It is. I'm always reminded of what Plato wrote in his "Republic" where he goes through forms of government and their downsides.

Regarding democracy, he said that in a situation where the will of the majority is imposed, it is very easy for a flatterer and liar to make themselves liked, take over the democracy and end it. The quote is easy enough to find by Googling "Trump and Plato" as it was widely discussed when Trump was elected.

Until now, American democracy has proved stronger, capable of correcting mistakes made. At least to balance them out, bounce back. We have to admit that the American state as invented by a group of 18th century English gentlemen is a good design. It has proved quite functional. But, of course, the other side is giving it their best shot, and they're not exactly hapless either.

Did the 18th century designers fail to anticipate someone like Donald Trump?

Of course, because they thought that an educated person is someone like them. It is the biggest mistake educated people keep making – thinking that if someone is given enough education and good social standing, they will have no choice but to think as we do, because it's just so natural.

The phenomenon of Donald Trump means more lives are lost in Ukraine every day as support for the country is stuck in Congress and might dry off completely should Trump be elected president. It is a stark outlook and no mistake.

It is a stark outlook, and I think that all the red flags should have gone up when Trump sent everyone out of the room and stayed there just with Putin and the interpreter. We don't know what was said, and I don't know whether we ever will, but something like that should not happen.

Mr. [Alexei] Navalny, as one of the very few remaining alternatives for Russia, was recently murdered, which was followed by debates of what would happen. Why has Russia not seen something resembling a civil war, which was still held realistic a year ago? We still remember Prigozhin and all the other men with their private armies, and people thought the cauldron might boil over at some point. But nothing has happened.

Something did happen. Prigozhin did start an armed rebellion. It remains a mystery why he didn't finish it, while we would be mistaken to believe Prigozhin's victory would have delivered a turn for the better. But perhaps he would have expedited the end of the current regime and the ensuing confusion could have in turn led to the emergence of a normal structure faster.

It is like a tooth that has just started to ache a little – if you quickly go to the dentist and have it fixed, it will keep working for a long time. But if you keep postponing seeing the dentist, take painkillers etc. then it will eventually have to be pulled. Unfortunately, it has been the attitude of the West to avoid going to the dentist because it's troublesome and painful and to take painkillers instead. Do this long enough and things take a turn for the worse. Whereas going to the dentist today might be much more expensive and possibly painful.

It is the same with political problems – suggesting that if we don't tackle it, it will somehow pass on its own. It will not, the only thing it will do is get worse. And the fallout people fear, its potential will only continue to grow, alongside the potential horrors of its aftermath.

It is not up to me to say how the Russia matter should be solved. I believe it is up to Russian citizens in their right mind. But I also believe there is too many of them, their territory is too big. I believe they would simply benefit from a phase of dissolution as it would be easier for democratic institutions to come about and for people to get used to them in smaller places. Perhaps they would unite into something greater again after that, but everyone would already have some experience of democracy.

The reality today is that the autonomous regions of Russia have less autonomy than U.S. states. What are we even talking about.

Let us also talk about Estonia, about education. As the first rector of Tallinn University, you have rare experience in merging different educational institutions, brining different work cultures and people under one roof. How do you see the Ministry of Education's attempt to reorganize the network of schools.

A lot of things should have been launched much sooner, while they were probably stuck behind political reasons. Also the economic model of education. In a situation where local governments have a lot of say, creating a single Estonian-speaking school system in places where most people speak Russian as their first language is not necessarily easy.

It should have started or been designed sooner, because it is among the most serious social risks when certain dividing lines – which are inevitable in any society because someone is always receiving more and someone less than the average salary – start running along lines in which people have no agency, such as the language spoken at home.

You don't get to choose the language your parents speak to you when you are born into this world. But if that language means that you will start receiving a relatively lower salary later in life, things are bad. It jeopardizes social cohesion.

If we had had a school system capable of giving people a level starting point, the same chance of getting into university after graduation irrespective of the language they spoke at home, we would have a much more cohesive society today. And the only way to achieve that in Estonia is to have a universal Estonian-language school system.

But it has been postponed time and again by asking why should Russian children learn in Estonian. Because they need skills to succeed in Estonia if they want to live in Estonia.

That does not mean they couldn't also learn about their cultural background or how to write properly in Russian – all of it is entirely normal.

We have such schools just a few hundred kilometers from here. I'm talking, for example, about the Stockholm Estonian School the graduates of which have a sufficient grasp on Swedish to make it there but also get a full Estonian education.

What about rural schools that are doing just fine but will still be closed because they have fewer than 100 students?

I just don't understand that! Whence this megalomania? If it is said that teachers are the salt of the earth, teachers of rural area schools are that par excellence.

Someone taking a ruler, drawing a line and saying that to one side are viable forests, while to the other are just some shrubs – it's just foolish and shortsighted.

And if someone now says that it is economically insensible [to maintain those schools], that we're losing this much money every month or year... We know that just isn't the case.

However, we need to cut costs somewhere if we are to pay for this tiny country of ours.

Allow me to answer by recalling a story I was told by a Finnish person. There was a small school somewhere near Kajaani in the northern part of Finland that didn't have a physics teacher. They had a taxi bring them one from 100 kilometers away once a week. They would then teach all of their classes before being taken back home the same way. When I asked them if this was perhaps too expensive, they said, look, Finland is not wealthy enough to afford risking leaving someone who might become a brilliant physicist without basic education.

Apparently, Estonia is that wealthy.

Are recent tax debates and the inability to make relevant decisions a sign of indecisive politicians, a weak opposition or is there another reason?

One and the other. I think that it is a major problem for us that our democracy works in election cycles. Every good thing that happens must happen within that one election cycle because it allows politicians to showcase what they have achieved by the time of the next election.

If something bad happens, it immediately delivers a setback at elections, which is why we cannot make plans that stretch ten, 15 or 20 years into the future. While we should spend time thinking about future goals today, it simply constitutes suicide for politicians.

Let us come to more personal matters. Your last novel, "Katkurong" (The Plague Train) won the Anton Hansen Tammsaare literary award. Congratulations!

Yes, thank you! It also took home the Virumaa Literature Prize.

What meaning do these prizes hold for you?

I'm very glad of those two as they largely reflect the opinion of readers. I think that nominations for the Tammsaare Prize come from libraries all over Estonia, while the Virumaa Literature Prize is also organized by local governments and libraries. The panel of judges of the former also included several schoolteachers, meaning that the book has reached its indended audience.

I was a little bit apprehensive when writing it because of the heavy topic and the pandemic at the time. I still remember the relationship between the disease and society.

Secondly because some modernist literary techniques were used which might not make for the easiest reading.

But it is all the more joyous to see that we still have high reading culture, that people read and can enjoy a classical novel in the good old sense.

It has been suggested that the novel could be turned into a solid television series. Will you make it happen?

It is not up to me, but if someone were to approach me, I would gladly agree.

You have a very sensitive social nerve and a political perspective as a writer, unlike many of your colleagues. Why do you express your opinion so seldom recently?

There are several reasons. Firstly, I have been preoccupied with other things. Secondly, I have always tried to address an audience that is open to an exchange of ideas, irrespective of whether they agree with my point or not. I've been writing mostly to people who have not yet settled on a position and who want to know both sides' argumentation; people who aren't convinced they know what's what.

I have my opinion, I present it alongside what I hold to be sensible arguments to support it, and people can then read the result to see where they agree and where they don't, which is how a debate can come about.

But right now, when everyone is sitting in their personal information bubbles, talking only to those who agree, expressing my opinion no longer has the same point.

What is your opinion of critics and criticism as concerns your work?

I try to stay on top of what is being written about me, whether people praise or criticize my work, how deep people delve when reading and whether they notice what's in the book.

Do you sometimes gather from the words of critics that they never read past half the book?

I have seen superficial claims from time to time, and it is certainly unpleasant when someone who has only skimmed the book is trying to poke fun or disparage it.

Do you remember their names?

I do.

There is this recent phenomenon in Estonia where people are shocked and offended when artists come out with social or political commentary. The recent example concerns a few photographs hung up in the street. What does that say about us?

Perhaps one part of it is that there have been constant attempts to turn art, literature and theater into a branch of the entertainment industry or make it safe. There is talk of consuming culture. But you cannot consume culture, that is not how it works. It's the customer asking why the product makes them anxious etc. – just a different way to see the world.

I believe that "Hetk" (Moment) is a brilliant project which brings us out of our comfort zone, show us that things like this happen, that they are happening in Ukraine, and that we cannot think we inhabit a different world with an impenetrable dome protecting it or that we could afford not to think about it. I believe the exhibition came just in time.

The past decade has seen movements which could be summed up as cancel culture wash over America and Europe. The wave also washes over Estonia every now and then. Why does it come and why does it go away again?

There are a lot of things that were considered normal by earlier societies. Also in our society 50, 100 or 150 years ago, but that are no longer normal, which is very good.

For example, people can no longer be sold and a manor lord cannot exchange a serving girl for two hounds. I hold that to be a very positive development. And there is a host of others.

But some people have adopted this culture of suggesting they were merely joking. It's like the owner of a dog trying to rip off your fingers suggesting that the pooch just wants to play. But I don't want to play like that.

People are used to their habits being natural. And while some do learn when told that what they are doing might be extremely insulting or painful for others, others can find it very difficult to get over.

When statues of Lenin were being removed in Estonia, we did not say that Lenin was falling victim to cancel culture. But if black people in the U.S. no longer wish to see a statue of someone who is famous for being cruel to black people, those who think that removing statues of Lenin is entirely normal might still lament it as cancel culture, suggesting that it's all in the past and that the statues should stay. We would be a little surprised if someone suggested to us that the whole Lenin thing is a part of your history, don't remove the statues, let them stand and remind you of that period. That said, tearing everything down also comes with its own dangers. Cutting symbols out of architecture makes for a very complicated set of problems.

Generally speaking, I believe that things which form a part of our history should not disappear from our historical memory at the risk of being repeated. But we should be able to explain it to new generations in a way they'd understand.

What will you be doing next?

I will be reading and writing as is my habit.

Are you already working on your next book?

I have some ideas.

What about politics? European Parliament elections are knocking. You would be a good fit for the top ranks of quite a few political parties, based on your values and principles.

I don't want to.

But have you been approached?

No, not recently. People have asked me why not go and give it try, attempt to get something done, and told me that I can always come back, but it is not compatible with my way of mind somehow. A politician needs to make very practical decisions, be able to adjust very quickly, think and express themselves differently.

I'm more of a theorist by nature. I like to ponder things long and slow, see all manner of aspects and points of view. A politician needs to be someone of action.

Our conversation today has followed along gloomy and sad lines, while it is Friday today (the interview was conducted on March 1 – ed.) and we are headed into the weekend. What should people do to keep up their spirits in such times?

Dance, for example.

Where does Rein Raud dance?

At home alone.

How?

You can don a pair of headphones, find music you like and prance around the house.

An excellent recommendation! Thank you for the conversation!

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and Twitter and never miss an update!