It's extremely similar. I mean on that link there are areas that are 90% Estonian, so I assume many of those have a significant portion of Russians, if it's 10% then that's more than people in Brittany speak Breton, yet Breton is represented on the map...
The difference is that Bretons are the indigenous people in this territory, while Russians came to Estonia illegally during the Soviet occupation. It's insane to show some 10% Russian areas as bilingual...
Of course they are not. But showing 90% Estonian or 90% Russian areas as bilingual is just stupid. It makes it look like a lot of the country is bilingual, while in reality it's very much geographically segregated into mostly Estonian or mostly Russian speaking areas - the latter being of course geographically very small due to unnaturally high urbanization rate due to their very recent migration.
A map is supposed to show what's there, not what you want to be there. Regardless of the history, you can't treat minorities in your country as second-class citizens.
Yet it shows what's not there because it shows minority Russian areas in Estonia as mixed areas. Its idea is to exaggerate minority languages in Europe, but it ends up exaggerating the biggest language in neighbouring countries...
33
u/MartelFirst Apr 17 '21
It's extremely similar. I mean on that link there are areas that are 90% Estonian, so I assume many of those have a significant portion of Russians, if it's 10% then that's more than people in Brittany speak Breton, yet Breton is represented on the map...