More than a century ago, in 1917, theBolsheviks seized power in Russia and began a program of merging nations, which ultimately was supposed to lead to the creation of a single Soviet people. Millions of communists and communist youth everywhere across the Soviet Union carried this ideology, being intolerant of any dissent. Freedom, brotherhood, and equality spread as a slogan across the entire socialist camp, encompassing many countries in Asia and Latin America. A future of communism and a world free of national self-consciousness, where private property does not exist and everything is shared according to a person's needs, loomed ahead. This ideology has not lost its vitality even after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the socialist camp's shift to the Western developmental space, as the genes of communist youth live on in numerous human rights activists and minority interest defenders, whose goal is to eliminate their opponents, melt nations into an amorphous, cultureless mass, and ultimately carry out a revolution to establish a new world order. This numerous group of extremists does not tolerate dissenting opinions or consider any objections. Like good Bolsheviks, they are ready to trample opponents into the mud. Gulag-like camps are not yet operational, although with the adoption of hate speech laws, which are also on the agenda in Estonia, the need for them is significantly increasing.

Migration destroys human rights in Europe.

Killing and torturing people are acts that should not be tolerated in modern cultural spaces. Yet, it is these acts that are acceptable by activists who talk about human rights from morning to night. Recent bloodshed by Hamas, for instance, has found understanding among human rights activists, as if the much-suffering Palestinian people could establish themselves through murder and rape. Feminists demand more effective protection for their fellow women suffering from domestic violence and more forceful punishment for abusive men, which is entirely acceptable. However, activists do not wish to speak about the sexual crimes committed in Europe, burdened by mass migration, by newcomers from a completely different cultural space. This seems to be allowed because they are so cute, these day thieves living on support, delivered across the Mediterranean by human traffickers. How else would they get a woman in a foreign, hostile environment if not by force? For example, in Sweden, areas have emerged that live by their own laws, where women are lower than grass, and white people and police are not allowed to set foot in this paradise, where Sharia laws apply. Why don't we hear human and women's rights activists complaining that refugees living in Europe demand absolute obedience from their women, that women who violate marital life are punished with ritual murder, and girls are mutilated as they used to do in their African homes? Hey lawyers, where is your sense of justice and courage? It doesn't exist, because migration is considered a sacred endeavor and the actions of fortune-seekers must not be condemned even when they deserve it.

The Human Rights Center must be closed or find wise leaders.

Recently, female politician Riina Solman published an article in Postimees criticizing Estonian human rights activists for hypocrisy and activities undermining the state. In response, the taxpayer-funded Human Rights Center's officials published a fierce rebuttal exuding extreme hatred. To this day, there has been no apology to Solman, nor any explanations as to why an organization parasitizing on state finances encourages individuals expelled from Estonia for anti-state activities to start lawsuits for their so-called rights. This is clearly an anti-state activity that Solman pointed out. If the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications continues to fund the Human Rights Center, it signifies that the threats to Estonian statehood have infiltrated state structures.

The problem raised by Riina Solman requires serious attention from both the government and domestic security agencies. It is hypocritical for a government, constantly complaining about a lack of funds, to find ways to finance extremists who present themselves as fighters for human rights, women, and minorities, who are alien to the state and people among whom they live.

Should human rights be protected? Of course, but it must be done within the framework of existing laws and with respect for all parties. Do women need support? Definitely, because where violence or gender-based elimination begins, intervention is necessary. Should minority interests be represented? There have never been problems with this in Estonia, rather tensions have been stirred up by the arrogance of same-sex activists towards the majority and their constant desire to expose themselves.

If responsible, empathetically strong individuals with normal thinking were to lead the human rights activists, they could stand not only for asylum seekers and minorities but also for the majority's interests, for instance, to increase pensions, not to rob large families of support, and to provide better salaries for teachers and rescuers instead of ridiculing them. But this is not attractive in the eyes of those carrying the Komsomol gene.

In society, opportunities for self-realization must be preserved for all, and this must be upheld. Unfortunately, extremism has destroyed the minds of many who call themselves rights activists, and instead of balancing society and drawing attention to real problems, they engage in increasingly dangerous substitute activities, which the state should not encourage.

Vsevolod Jürgenson