How much Russians and Slavs would Finland have had right now if it would have went Communist either after WWI or after WWII?

Larrey

Ad Honorem
Sep 2011
5,387
#2
Kind of unanswerable. Had it become a republic in the Soviet Union, possibly rather a lot (decent sized minority). Had it done so while maintaining national independence, hardly any. (Differently put, Yes, if conquered by the Soviets, but No, if opting for Communism by itself, which is what didn't happen historically.)
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
18,701
SoCal
#3
Kind of unanswerable. Had it become a republic in the Soviet Union, possibly rather a lot (decent sized minority). Had it done so while maintaining national independence, hardly any. (Differently put, Yes, if conquered by the Soviets, but No, if opting for Communism by itself, which is what didn't happen historically.)
I meant if Finland would have become a part of the Soviet Union. Would its Slavic percentage be comparable to Latvia's and Estonia's or would it be closer to Lithuania's, in your opinion?
 

Larrey

Ad Honorem
Sep 2011
5,387
#4
Depends on a lot of variables. The Finnish SSR would likely be rather larger than independent Finland as we know it, Carelia most of all being tacked on to it.

But on balance, more like Lithuania seems likelier.

It's a bigger place, with a larger population, than Estonia and Latvia, so more like Lithuania like that. (But something as simple as geographic proximity to Leningrad might throw that out of whack a bit though, as in rather larger spill-over from that major Russian population center.)

Edit: What I think would have happened in Finland is that at specific points a helluva lot of Soviet military installations would have gone up, with A LOT of Soviet military personnel, including families, moving in and taking up residence. We can assume local clusters of relatively large number of non-Finnish Soviet citizens. Finland in its entirity would have become a very long, large and possibly rather heated Cold War border. Sweden can be assumed to go hell for leather towards NATO with a Soviet Finland as next-door neighbour, at least as long as the Norwegians and Danes would be NATO (and they did opt for that). The Baltic would have been an even more militarized stand-off zone between NATO and the USSR than what happened historically.

There would be a downside for the USSR too – no Finland to act as a tech-import bridge to the west...
 
Last edited:
Likes: Futurist

Theodoric

Ad Honorem
Mar 2012
2,734
#5
Trotsky: "What about Finland?"
Lenin: "Do we actually own Finland?"
Trotsky: "Apparently."
Lenin: "Oh.... Do either of you wish to govern it?"
*Silence*
Stalin: "Let's just use it for storage."
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
18,701
SoCal
#9
Indeed. Much refers to an amount of an uncountable noun. 'Russians' is a countable noun so many should be used instead. Thank you for teaching us proper English sir!
What about if one will give one a package of apples and one will say that this is too much apples? Would that be wrong? Would it be supposed to be many?
 
Sep 2012
3,778
Bulgaria
#10
@Futurist I am a foreigner learning the language, so probably you should talk about the specifics of this issue with another native speaker or better yet with a linguist. The rule regarding this matter i learnt is: for a non-count noun like air much should be used, for a count noun like Russians many should be used.

Countable and uncountable nouns | English Grammar | EF
 
Last edited:
Likes: Futurist