Skip to main content

Estonian Egalitarianism (= success)

One of the most attractive features of Estonian society is the complete lack of anything that could be described as social hierarchy. Even in countries smaller than Estonia a great deal of pomp is given to the political leaders- large numbers of bodyguards, police outriders on motorcades, government jets and all the toys of the powerful. In Estonia the ministers fly commercial and the level of security is minimally discreet.


Talking last night to a friend who is the head of one of the largest local banks, he remarked on the fact that Estonians do not feel constrained by different levels of wealth- money is not a social barrier. There are creative people who have very little money, but they may still socialize with business leaders, indeed artists or writers have their own clubs, and an invitation to visit is quite prized- and is not a function of price in the slightest.


I suppose this egalitarianism is a function of the long periods when Estonians were an undifferentiated mass of peasantry, and even when some were able to become freeholders or even move into the professional classes in the 19th century, they kept their roots in the land. Of course the occupation too undermined the political power of the wealthy, mostly by stealing most things of value. 


Even still, the open access that Estonians have to their political and economic leaders is appealing. I saw the Prime Minister out practicing his skiing before the snows come- though I was not aware he injured himself. 


This egalitarianism is a very stubborn root, and clearly is a part of Estonian political culture that nurtures the highest democratic values. Whether it comes from Lutheranism, from education or indeed from "peasant values", it is one reason why corruption is generally held in check. The kind of blatant theft that is obvious in Russia could not be tolerated in Estonia. Though, doubtless there are plenty of self-serving and venial politicians in the Estonian political class- the vast majority are not. Where a political figure comes under question, there is a clear question of disgrace and shame: not, most assuredly the case in many other countries.


So Estonians are educated, open minded and egalitarian. It certainly helps explain the radicalism of Estonian Liberalism- and its electoral success.


After I penned this article I noticed the latest piece from the excellent Eastern Approaches blog from The Economist. 

Comments

Jüri Saar said…
Just because something takes a different form doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I urge you took look more carefuly at how Estonians talk and socialize with the local Russians. This also seems to have unfortunate implications for the liberalization of immigration policy and the ability to keep younger Estonians expecting more variety for leaving for greener pastures.
Cicero said…
Fair point, I think that Estonians do respond differently to Russians, and also to me, as another non-Estonian, but I don't think that changes how they interact with one another. So while I think you have a point that Estonian society is not notably diverse, it IS notably anti-hierarchy, and that is really the point I am making. Compared to Lithuania, which is quite a hierarchical country,built on Catholic rather than Protestant principles, Estonia has a pretty small emigration. I think those two issue are closely linked. At least in Estonia the young still play a big role in society, even if that role is not as big as it was, say 20 year ago. In Lithuania the emigration is more like 30% than 5%, because the younger generation do not feel that they can control their own destiny, the way young Estonians can and largely do.

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...