Narva, Estonia
Here in Narva — the easternmost city in Estonia, on the Russian border — more than 90 per cent of the 60,000 inhabitants are native Russian speakers. Ever since Russia’s annexation of Crimea in 2014, and more so since its all-out invasion of Ukraine in February, this sizeable Russian population has been the subject of widespread speculation about whether they will be the next national minority to turn on their home country.
When Russia invaded Ukraine, Estonia became more heavy-handed in clearing out the vestiges of the old Soviet occupation, including war graves and monuments to the Red Army. Last Tuesday, a controversial Soviet-era T-34 tank memorial was removed from its plinth, despite overwhelming local popularity and following weeks of debates. Eleven people were detained overnight for “violent” resistance or placing military symbols at its former site, according to Estonian media.
“It is precisely to ensure public order that all of these monuments need to be removed, before tensions or anxiety build,” Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas told reporters in Narva last week. Many younger Russian speakers in Narva seem to have little love for that country. “The Russian world was always toxic but now it’s more toxic than ever,” said Viktor Antipov, a 26-year-old poet.
“The older generation is confused because when the Soviet Union collapsed they needed some kind of hole to fill. They needed to fill it. The Estonian government did not do this. I think probably the younger generation of Narva, they feel too left out to have an identity.” In Narva there is a particular district that seems to be home to a higher concentration of Putin supporters — vatniki, as they are derogatorily known. From Kulgu, a district recently unironically rebranded as the city’s “Venice”, you can see Russia over the river.

It has a certain rustic charm. Waterways are partially covered in dense clusters of lilies and lined with hundreds of old Soviet garages whose owners are understandably suspicious of foreign journalists. One 40-year-old named Pasha is willing to chat while he drinks. He said the Estonian state had “fucked us, they fucked us twice. First in the 1990s [after independence from the USSR] and second, when they closed these Russian schools. What did we do wrong? We are like n****s. Estonia gave me nothing.”
Pasha admits that a war is going on, but refuses to believe that Russia is responsible — instead laying the blame at America’s feet. “Who started it, Ukraine or Russia?” he asked, rhetorically. “Four hundred per cent it was America, because all over the world America puts its nose in.” More broadly, though, there seems to be a tacit understanding among the people of Narva that it is simply safer not to discuss geopolitics so they can co-exist without serious friction. “Only on a few occasions have I had the courage to bring it up and deal with it, it’s such an emotional topic,” said Johanna Rannula, an Estonian who runs the Narva Art Residency.
Yana Toom, an MEP from Narva who was once married to the son of the local KGB chief in Estonia, has spoken out against the war — but still stands firm on her position that Estonia should be catering more to Russian speakers in the region. As discussions surrounding the Soviet tank developed, Toom was one of many local Russians who argued against it being removed. “[The monument] is important to Narva’s people, and should be, and should be preserved,” she said.
The tank was not conspicuously placed in the city, on an isolated stretch of road between the city centre and the beach. Yet the week before its removal, the thoroughfare was packed with cars as locals flocked to visit the T-34. But the government stood firm. “A tank is a murder weapon, it is not a memorial object, and these same tanks are killing people,” Kallas said at the beginning of August. It is being moved to the Estonian War Museum in Viimsi, some 200km from its former home.
The tank may be gone, but tensions remain in these Estonian borderlands.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeOh dear. This will upset quite a few politicians and various activists/influencers (sic).
I am sure it will be said that this report was written by some blatant racist.
Naw, you’re not up with the words on the street. Try racial gatekeepers, bounty bars, coconuts.
Naw, you’re not up with the words on the street. Try racial gatekeepers, bounty bars, coconuts.
No. Sadly, they will just pretend this does not exist.
I am sure it will be said that this report was written by some blatant racist.
No. Sadly, they will just pretend this does not exist.
Oh dear. This will upset quite a few politicians and various activists/influencers (sic).
The King’s College survey will carry no weight with our activist elite. The link in the final paragraph will take you to a Guardian page much more in line with their world view. It’s filled with data ‘proving’ that Britain is still a racist society in desperate need of a good dose of social engineering. The data has been gleaned from familiar activist-riddled sources of course: The Runnymede Trust and Bristol University.
It is worth spending a little time reading the Bristol report. It is available here (https://policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/ethnic-inequalities-in-a-time-of-crisis). It is open access, so you can read every word. The question asked was had the respondent experienced racial attack before the pandemic. No timeframe (eg last five years before the pandemic) was mentioned. So if an elderly man had “Go home, N****r” just once in the 1960s, then that was noted.
The point is that the researchers could not have set the bar any lower if they had tried. You could repeat the exercise, by asking people if they had ever experienced dangerous driving on the motorway, even just once; then you could create the impression that our motorways are deathtraps, filled with lunatic drivers.
But I encourage readers to use the link above and judge for themselves.
Reminds me of how the ever-widening definition of domestic abuse creates the impression that a huge number of men are wife-beaters (of some sort or another).
The object of such studies is not to determine the truth but to create evidence to back up the prejudicial notion that society is corrupt and immoral.
And on this ‘ever widening definition of domestic abuse’ would you care to give an example so all the female readers can see, and maybe even comment?
How about so that everybody can comment?
I am reminded of the expansion of the Australian definition of domestic abuse a few years ago to include door slamming and walking out of the house. The latter of course is something primarily men do in domestic disputes…and now it’s evidence of abuse.
Of course, do the responsible thing and remove yourself from the situation, breath, cool down, don’t let your anger get the better of you, this is what decent men do in such situations but now they’re defining it as abuse? Heaven help us!
Of course, do the responsible thing and remove yourself from the situation, breath, cool down, don’t let your anger get the better of you, this is what decent men do in such situations but now they’re defining it as abuse? Heaven help us!
How about so that everybody can comment?
I am reminded of the expansion of the Australian definition of domestic abuse a few years ago to include door slamming and walking out of the house. The latter of course is something primarily men do in domestic disputes…and now it’s evidence of abuse.
And on this ‘ever widening definition of domestic abuse’ would you care to give an example so all the female readers can see, and maybe even comment?
Has such a survey been carried out in African and Islamic countries to identify their warm welcome and integration of white, Christian, Jewish and Hindu peoples? Do they read the news, appear on TV advertisements, work as politicians and/ or in Government? If not, perhaps someone out there can explain why not?… or perhaps get arrested and charged, and convicted on no independent evidence of a hate crime?
Reminds me of how the ever-widening definition of domestic abuse creates the impression that a huge number of men are wife-beaters (of some sort or another).
The object of such studies is not to determine the truth but to create evidence to back up the prejudicial notion that society is corrupt and immoral.
Has such a survey been carried out in African and Islamic countries to identify their warm welcome and integration of white, Christian, Jewish and Hindu peoples? Do they read the news, appear on TV advertisements, work as politicians and/ or in Government? If not, perhaps someone out there can explain why not?… or perhaps get arrested and charged, and convicted on no independent evidence of a hate crime?
It is worth spending a little time reading the Bristol report. It is available here (https://policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/ethnic-inequalities-in-a-time-of-crisis). It is open access, so you can read every word. The question asked was had the respondent experienced racial attack before the pandemic. No timeframe (eg last five years before the pandemic) was mentioned. So if an elderly man had “Go home, N****r” just once in the 1960s, then that was noted.
The point is that the researchers could not have set the bar any lower if they had tried. You could repeat the exercise, by asking people if they had ever experienced dangerous driving on the motorway, even just once; then you could create the impression that our motorways are deathtraps, filled with lunatic drivers.
But I encourage readers to use the link above and judge for themselves.
The King’s College survey will carry no weight with our activist elite. The link in the final paragraph will take you to a Guardian page much more in line with their world view. It’s filled with data ‘proving’ that Britain is still a racist society in desperate need of a good dose of social engineering. The data has been gleaned from familiar activist-riddled sources of course: The Runnymede Trust and Bristol University.
How about the fact that the indigenous population actually lives in fear, that they are no longer allowed to express, that they are having large parts of their country taken over by cultures who have no respect for the indigenous people, but who are protected by laws and rights passed by British governments, that give them what are effectively superior rights and freedoms, and that many of the immigrants wish to see a Britain that will subsume to their culture and religious identity, and are using insurgence war and violence all over the African continent to achieve that aim, and terrorism elsewhere in the world? paranoia?… or provable fact?
Err think you jumped to the ‘fire and brimstone’ stuff bit quick there NST and missed the Survey conclusion. British public are pretty chilled out about living next door to someone from different background and culture. Not exactly hiding in the cellar.
Err think you jumped to the ‘fire and brimstone’ stuff bit quick there NST and missed the Survey conclusion. British public are pretty chilled out about living next door to someone from different background and culture. Not exactly hiding in the cellar.
How about the fact that the indigenous population actually lives in fear, that they are no longer allowed to express, that they are having large parts of their country taken over by cultures who have no respect for the indigenous people, but who are protected by laws and rights passed by British governments, that give them what are effectively superior rights and freedoms, and that many of the immigrants wish to see a Britain that will subsume to their culture and religious identity, and are using insurgence war and violence all over the African continent to achieve that aim, and terrorism elsewhere in the world? paranoia?… or provable fact?
This is so annoying, I’ve made my mind up, so why do you keep confusing me by presenting “alternative” facts?
This is so annoying, I’ve made my mind up, so why do you keep confusing me by presenting “alternative” facts?
What about the minorities who used to enjoy Hunting? What about Old Etonians and so called ” toffs” who can be abused and insulted verbally and in print? What about the old aristocracy who were banned from The Upper House? So it is perfectly acceptable to pillory, abuse, and ridicule a small section of society, who through no fault of their own were born into some privelige, and openly express hatred, and dislike of them? to mock their accents and the way that they dress?
Fortunately, they dont care, but all I am attempting to illustrate is that the bare faced rank hypocricy that festers in nu britain, not least driven by emerald green faced envy, is almost funny.
Not to mention dog fighting, badger baiting and countless other age old ‘country pursuits!
However given the antics of the Provost and Headmaster of Eton in recent years, there is definitely a ‘case to answer’.
But NST, you are missing the point – most of these Toffs are into a bit of S&M submission. It’s ingrained from prep-school. They’d pay for it at weekends anyway.
oik…
oik…
Not to mention dog fighting, badger baiting and countless other age old ‘country pursuits!
However given the antics of the Provost and Headmaster of Eton in recent years, there is definitely a ‘case to answer’.
But NST, you are missing the point – most of these Toffs are into a bit of S&M submission. It’s ingrained from prep-school. They’d pay for it at weekends anyway.
What about the minorities who used to enjoy Hunting? What about Old Etonians and so called ” toffs” who can be abused and insulted verbally and in print? What about the old aristocracy who were banned from The Upper House? So it is perfectly acceptable to pillory, abuse, and ridicule a small section of society, who through no fault of their own were born into some privelige, and openly express hatred, and dislike of them? to mock their accents and the way that they dress?
Fortunately, they dont care, but all I am attempting to illustrate is that the bare faced rank hypocricy that festers in nu britain, not least driven by emerald green faced envy, is almost funny.
Not for much longer.
We were warned eons ago by EP.
Not for much longer.
We were warned eons ago by EP.
This report simply confirms that facts are tools of white supremacy, designed to oppress minorities. And it threatens thousands of jobs in the race industry. Reports should be cancelled.
This report simply confirms that facts are tools of white supremacy, designed to oppress minorities. And it threatens thousands of jobs in the race industry. Reports should be cancelled.
There is’nt a country without racism,even in mono cultures ,even the slightest difference can trigger it,even if those differences can not be noticed by outsiders…
There is’nt a country without racism,even in mono cultures ,even the slightest difference can trigger it,even if those differences can not be noticed by outsiders…
Blacks used to complain they didnt see themselves on screen. Now it is the opposite and every ad portrays a multiracial couple. White people dont see themselves.
Blacks used to complain they didnt see themselves on screen. Now it is the opposite and every ad portrays a multiracial couple. White people dont see themselves.
Diana Abbot would be furious with this report if she could understand the statistics.
Diana Abbot would be furious with this report if she could understand the statistics.
Let us look at some of the things that some over the last 20 years, may call progress? Armed police, Downing st behind gates and armed police, airport security and searches, and more armed police, anti terrorist security outside our Parliament, domestic terrorist attacks, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan… what is the common denominator?
Let us look at some of the things that some over the last 20 years, may call progress? Armed police, Downing st behind gates and armed police, airport security and searches, and more armed police, anti terrorist security outside our Parliament, domestic terrorist attacks, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan… what is the common denominator?
This accords with my very positive experiences as an N. Irish person (from the terrorist community) living in England (Midlands, Yorkshire and London) for most of the 1990s. In my lived experience, British everyday culture is extremely tolerant, and good humoured. Just good fun! People generally prefer banter, and if a conversation in a pub is becoming too “heavy”, someone will always take the p, and steer things back on a more light-hearted track. It’s a lovely culture. I only have great memories of my time in England. By contrast, the first time I went to New York, whilst I enjoyed the city itself very much, the racial tension there was palpable, and was something that 10 years living in Britain had not prepared me for. See my blog on “The New Apartheid”:
https://ayenaw.com/2021/10/10/the-new-apartheid/
This accords with my very positive experiences as an N. Irish person (from the terrorist community) living in England (Midlands, Yorkshire and London) for most of the 1990s. In my lived experience, British everyday culture is extremely tolerant, and good humoured. Just good fun! People generally prefer banter, and if a conversation in a pub is becoming too “heavy”, someone will always take the p, and steer things back on a more light-hearted track. It’s a lovely culture. I only have great memories of my time in England. By contrast, the first time I went to New York, whilst I enjoyed the city itself very much, the racial tension there was palpable, and was something that 10 years living in Britain had not prepared me for. See my blog on “The New Apartheid”:
https://ayenaw.com/2021/10/10/the-new-apartheid/
Why did the UK spike upwards in about 1997?
Why did the UK spike upwards in about 1997?
Maybe this ‘tolerance’ is a sign of decline.
Maybe this ‘tolerance’ is a sign of decline.
Useful counter weight to some of the more outlandish claims of racial bias in modern Britain. We all know things are better than when we were kids and casual awful racism was common. A credit to our Nation, albeit with a few things we can still do better.
Nonetheless having gone through the report it does depend on how questions are phrased and how things are defined. Now if the UnHerd usual commentariat were selectively polled I wonder if we’d hold to the 2% too?
And given the key conclusions – folks are pretty chilled about who lives next door regardless of background and culture – suggestive we’ll have no problem absorbing and getting comfortable with a gradual change in demographic going forward (not more in total just a change in make-up).
Ah but now there’s uproar that one could suggest that. Thus is it really 2%, or just an UnHerd silo that might buck the trend?
I might have known you’d have to put your oar in Watson. By the way, don’t you qualify as one of UnHerd’s usual commentariat? Not a day goes by without one of your schoolmasterly contributions such as this choice extract:
You forgot to add: “We must all pull our socks up and there’s no room for complacency”.
V glad you’re paying attention at the back of class there NS. Will keep giving you the homework.
V glad you’re paying attention at the back of class there NS. Will keep giving you the homework.
I might have known you’d have to put your oar in Watson. By the way, don’t you qualify as one of UnHerd’s usual commentariat? Not a day goes by without one of your schoolmasterly contributions such as this choice extract:
You forgot to add: “We must all pull our socks up and there’s no room for complacency”.
Useful counter weight to some of the more outlandish claims of racial bias in modern Britain. We all know things are better than when we were kids and casual awful racism was common. A credit to our Nation, albeit with a few things we can still do better.
Nonetheless having gone through the report it does depend on how questions are phrased and how things are defined. Now if the UnHerd usual commentariat were selectively polled I wonder if we’d hold to the 2% too?
And given the key conclusions – folks are pretty chilled about who lives next door regardless of background and culture – suggestive we’ll have no problem absorbing and getting comfortable with a gradual change in demographic going forward (not more in total just a change in make-up).
Ah but now there’s uproar that one could suggest that. Thus is it really 2%, or just an UnHerd silo that might buck the trend?
So what explains Brexit?
Indeed, obviously nothing to do with racism. Perhaps it could have been something else like a desire to have some sort of democratic accountability – who knows?
It was because we wanted to be able to have as many E numbers in our Prawn cocktail crisps as we jolly well felt like and they can stick those EU rules where the Sun don’t shine…err even if we’d written them.
Nonetheless Vote Leave made sure it covered all bases with the rubbish about 70 million Turks coming tomorrow and influx of Syrian refugees, because it did want any racists to vote for them even if that’s just a small v stupid minority.
what exactly IS racism? please elaborate?
It was because we wanted to be able to have as many E numbers in our Prawn cocktail crisps as we jolly well felt like and they can stick those EU rules where the Sun don’t shine…err even if we’d written them.
Nonetheless Vote Leave made sure it covered all bases with the rubbish about 70 million Turks coming tomorrow and influx of Syrian refugees, because it did want any racists to vote for them even if that’s just a small v stupid minority.
what exactly IS racism? please elaborate?
Something else, obviously.
Why would BREXIT have been a racist vote? – perhapds you are confusing it with somehtign else.
There was an element of the campaign to curb the free movement of predominantly white people from other EU countries, so absolutely nothing to do with racism. Obviously yet again the truth is inconvenient to those who wanted to paint leave voters as old, stupid and racist so they could be justified in going against the democratically expressed will of the people – old, stupid, racist and anyone else who does not agree with what the elite says is best for them really should not have the vote at all.
There was an element of the campaign to curb the free movement of predominantly white people from other EU countries, so absolutely nothing to do with racism. Obviously yet again the truth is inconvenient to those who wanted to paint leave voters as old, stupid and racist so they could be justified in going against the democratically expressed will of the people – old, stupid, racist and anyone else who does not agree with what the elite says is best for them really should not have the vote at all.
Assuming anti immigration sentiment was one element of the vote, is it the same thing as racism?
Antipathy to a significant influx of largely unskilled and semi skilled workers driving down wages in lower income groups, driving up rent, and overwhelming public services, would seem reasonable objections from an indigenous population.
Why hang a pejorative tag on a rational reaction?
So what explains Brexit?
Scepticism of and/or disenchantment with the EU and a desire for more democratic accountability, I imagine. And possibly a distaste for the much higher levels of racism characteristic of so many EU countries such as France, Spain, Italy, Greece and Poland (see the charts above).
The UK will Never get credit,there will always be bullhorns on the left crying stuff like institutionalised racism,when the Truth is mainland Europe is considerably More racist than the UK..p.s.It’s interesting to look at the EU parliament ,which is whiter than a klan rally,despite members whom like Britain are former colonial powers such as France ,Spain and the Netherlands ,but have few ethnics in either their respective goverments and in the EU parliament,even though France has a sizable Arab and African populace,ironically there were more brown and black faces in the EU parliament when the Brexit party was there..
The UK will Never get credit,there will always be bullhorns on the left crying stuff like institutionalised racism,when the Truth is mainland Europe is considerably More racist than the UK..p.s.It’s interesting to look at the EU parliament ,which is whiter than a klan rally,despite members whom like Britain are former colonial powers such as France ,Spain and the Netherlands ,but have few ethnics in either their respective goverments and in the EU parliament,even though France has a sizable Arab and African populace,ironically there were more brown and black faces in the EU parliament when the Brexit party was there..
The intelligence, political sophistication, courage and patriotism of the British public.
Followed by May, Bojo, Mad Liz and Rish!
Satire is not dead.
Followed by May, Bojo, Mad Liz and Rish!
Satire is not dead.
Cos you can welcome immigration without wishing for endless immigration.
Yes you are right GT. And that is where the heart of the country almost certainly is
Yes you are right GT. And that is where the heart of the country almost certainly is
Indeed, obviously nothing to do with racism. Perhaps it could have been something else like a desire to have some sort of democratic accountability – who knows?
Something else, obviously.
Why would BREXIT have been a racist vote? – perhapds you are confusing it with somehtign else.
Assuming anti immigration sentiment was one element of the vote, is it the same thing as racism?
Antipathy to a significant influx of largely unskilled and semi skilled workers driving down wages in lower income groups, driving up rent, and overwhelming public services, would seem reasonable objections from an indigenous population.
Why hang a pejorative tag on a rational reaction?
So what explains Brexit?
Scepticism of and/or disenchantment with the EU and a desire for more democratic accountability, I imagine. And possibly a distaste for the much higher levels of racism characteristic of so many EU countries such as France, Spain, Italy, Greece and Poland (see the charts above).
The intelligence, political sophistication, courage and patriotism of the British public.
Cos you can welcome immigration without wishing for endless immigration.
So what explains Brexit?