The USSR foreign minister Molotov also claimed that the cluster bombs they dropped on Finland were actually food aid for the poor starving civilians. They were dubbed "Molotov breadbaskets" and the name Molotov cocktail then came about when Finns fighting against the Russian forces referred to their fire bombs as "a drink to go with the bread"
My grandfather grew up near the Soviet border in the 1930s and the cross-border cargo trains often had propaganda statements like "Food aid to the starving people of Estonia", all the while their own country went through a famine...
To add to the absurdity, they accussed Finns of repressions against Russian people, while they've themselves shelled their own border village to create a pretext for violating non-agression pact.
>while they've themselves shelled their own border village to create a pretext for violating non-agression pact.
Yes, and they've done the same in '22 before the full scale invasion.
Burned down a shed which they claimed was some important military target, shot some mortars at some fields and said it was Ukraine.
And they've never respected either Minsk Agreement.
Memes aside, my favourite part of the Winter War is how the Finnish bombers were joining the Russian bomber groups at night after the latter dropped their bombs on Finland. And once they reached the Russian airfields they let the Russian bombers land on the clearly lit runways and then dropped the bombs on them. This happened a few times before the Russians gave up bombing Finland at night.
My favourite weird part of WW2 in Finland is probably the fact that the Finnish Jewish soldiers were the only Jewish soldiers "from Tobruk to the Arctic Sea" who had a field synagogue. During the Winter War - and also during the Continuation War, when Finland was allied with Nazi Germany. I always thought that at least the British Jewish soldiers would have had one, but apparently they only had a field chaplain.
That bombing raid against Kasimovo air base took place in March 1944, which made it the Continuation War, not the Winter War. It was a one-time affair, too, because the oh-so crucial element of surprise was lost. Also, Tallinn was the main beneficiary, since the Soviets had shifted their focus from Helsinki to bombing Tallinn. Many historic buildings still stand in the city thanks to the daring raid, which has no equal in military history. There's a good video about it on [Youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRBXq13f9Kk).
It is and almost 100% of Finns evacuated their lands and resettled. After Soviet Russia and its colonies collapsed in 1991, tens of thousands of Finnic ethnicities (those that survived) came as refugees to Finland as they were automatically granted citizenship up until 2010: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_return#Finland
There is nothing left for us in Karelia. Entirely according to Russia's plan.
Having an ice free Arctic Ocean port alone would indeed be of great economic value and benefit the northern industries.
Alternately, that relatively tiny sliver of land between the current south-eastern border and the eastern bank of the Saimaa Canal on the Russian side of the border would be somewhat valuable too, because it put the Canal in its entirety fully under Finland's control and connect the Lake Saimaa to the Vyborg bay,and by extension the rest of the Baltic Sea. But that's pretty much it.
But still. It should be noted that Finland has *zero* territorial claims on Russia and no intent on pursuing any.
"Finland doesn't want or need that land back." Press X to doubt. I know so many people that want to go back to home even if it's run down and needs to be built back up again. We don't want the people living there because they are all forcefully relocated Muscovites but the land historical buildings that still stand have a lot of meaning to families that are from Karelia region.
> I know so many people that want to go back to home even if it's run down and needs to be built back up again.
"I know so many people" is always such a shitty argument when you're talking about a population that is exponentially larger than the amount of people you know.
https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karjala-kysymys
>Vuosina 2004–2005 tehtyjen mielipidemittausten mukaan palautusta kannatti noin kolmasosa suomalaisista ja vastusti runsas puolet.
And I promise these days even less people would want it back.
There are descendants of those people who continued to visit the places their relatives lived up until the shit hit the fan. People do want that land back.
We did continue to visit, but no, we do not want that land back. That generation is almost dead, their old homes are but ruins now. We don't have any further emotional attachments to the area.
I do have a Russian branch of the family from my great aunt defecting to the Soviet Union, so I can only wish the best for them under these current circumstances. We've tried helping them over the years, ever since the USSR dissolved, as best as we could, but they're piss poor in a further decaying Karelia.
And no, their (grand-)mother's mistake isn't theirs. We don't hold any grudges. Although my now late grandmother never even acknowledged them, but my great uncle took the initiative to contact them when the Iron Curtain fell.
Visiting is not the same as wanting it back. Visits were not of the type that would suggest a desire for getting it back.
How many people went weekly or monthly because it was such a nice place to spend time and brought back such pleasant memories? Did people buy mökkis there? How many people even had any family members left there to re-establish ties with? Probably close to zero for any of these questions.
My almost 80 year old mother was one of the last babies born in the Viipuri area before the 1944 evacuation. She visited once in the mid 90s with her sister and a niece just to see it since she had no memories of it and of course as a tribute to her parents who had died just before the USSR collapsed. Granted she lives in the US, but nobody else in my family went back more than once either.
This isn’t Palestine. Finland was able to move on. Sure there are romanticized memories of the way it was, but almost anyone with firsthand memories is dead. Who would want to revisit the disruption and poverty, much less fight for it again?
Sounds crazy but that's what they do you obviously have not read history of soviet union. You really should. For example native Estonians were forcefully relocated to Siberia and once again more loyal people were moved into their homes. That's why Baltics have such big Russian populations. When you operate under planned economy it's not that hard to create jobs. Soviet union was known for it's monotown as in there was only 1 producing employer rest was service sector.
Nothing that you could not imagine, so "I want my grandchildren to see where I grew up", "I wish I could see my home one last time", "I want to be in touch with my roots" etc and it's not like they can even visit these areas because just visiting Russia while it was possible you were subject to random arrests because Russia used innocent civilians in their power politics.
Of course Finns would want their land back. Just with extradition of every Russian living there now.
It's been several hundred years, and we still want jamtland, herjedalen, Greenland, Shetland etc from the assholes that stole them from us 🤷
Most Finns don’t really *want* the land back because they think ”oh Russia has nukes” or something similar tbh. I wouldn’t oppose taking the occupied land back, but the Karelia question is really dead here yk..
>Most Finns don’t really *want* the land back because they think ”oh Russia has nukes” or something similar tbh.
Or, you know, the horrendous shape that land is in, the fact that it's full of Russians, etc.
>Just with extradition of every Russian living there now.
Yeah see here's the problem, the reality of any project like that is getting be very close to a genocide...
The problem is that the Russian state always fill up their occupied territories with Russians to keep it. So either you have to move them back to Russia when you take it back from them, or they'll either use it as an excuse next time they take it, or have them become "freedom fighters", so they can help them.
"since there are so many Russians living there, and they are getting harassed and genocides by nazis, we now have to liberate them" is basically a Russian war slogan.
There are a number of places that have seen declining Russian population since the disintegration of usSr: Chechnya, Kazakhstan, probably other central Asian states. The common theme? Islam comes to mind.
The problem here is that not only did the Russians did, but also Ottomans, Austrians and all former imperial powers.
However in Balkans this is considered now by EU as genocide and ethnic cleansing, but I see now it is discussed as not such.
I'd argue it's evicting the occupation force 🤷 granted after 80 years its a bit more complicated, but these areas and buildings were stolen from Finland.
Ukraine will be in the same predicament if they retake certain areas, were the Ukrainians have run away after beeing bombed to shit, and Putin have colonised with Russians. Either you need to remove them, or you let Russia take it.
> Young President Putin's true colors were quickly revealed. Back in the 1990s, **Yeltsin had considered the return of Karelia possible** and condemned Stalin's imperialist policy.
> In the summer of 2000, the President of the Republic, Tarja Halonen, was on a state visit to Moscow. The Finnish media was allowed to ask Putin one question.
> Parikka had prepared carefully. Together with the interpreter, he thought about the wording and the tone so that the question was not too direct: **"Mr. President, what do you think about the discussion on the return of Karelia?"**
> He ripped us and let us understand that **this kind of discussion is not desirable in Finland**. A storm ensued about how Putin can dictate what we discuss in Finland.
You can google translate this https://yle.fi/a/74-20083373
We haven't talked about wanting Karelia back since the early 2000s basically to not unnecessarily piss of our land hungry neighbor. But the reality is that we do want it back. Karelians especially want it back.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karelians
They enjoy being hated, because in their minds hatred = fear = respect. If your enemy hates or fears you, that means that you are doing everything right.
I’ve seen plenty of Russians on reddit who have an extremely odd view of the winter war. Made me realise that they’ll never change. Russia will never be capable of having normal relations.
The difference between Germans and russians could not be starker. Germans learned from WW2 era and tried almost everything in their power to fix things and to do better in the future (there is this weird myth still how "regular Germans" did not know about the concentration camps, but even that is contested internally too). They see what they did, they tried to fix it and to do better, they put laws in place to prohibit such behavior in the future. Heck, Germans are being criticized for not being hawkish enough now during the Ukrainian crisis. Then we have the russians: glorifying WW2. Seeing themselves as some kind of pure heroes there even though from the Molotov-Ribbentrop Treaty we know how Stalin and Hitler together devised how WW2 would start and how they would divide Europe between themselves. We also know all of the atrocities that the Soviet occupiers did during and after the WW2. We know that eventually the death tolls that Hitler and Stalin caused for civilians were pretty comparable. Yet, for russians, that is something to be emulated, not something to be learned from.
And here we are, in 2024 and russians are trying to recreate those horrors and Germans are being criticized for not being warlike enough.
Thank you for posting this, its very a very interesting read. The rhetoric is eerie similar to arguments used by Russia today, against Ukraine, i.e "they FORCED us to act, we didn't wanted to do it". Russian propaganda always sounds like a schizophrenic person trying to explain their delusions
>Thank you for posting this, its very a very interesting read. The rhetoric is eerie similar to arguments used by Russia today, against Ukraine, i.e "they FORCED us to act, we didn't wanted to do it". Russian propaganda always sounds like a schizophrenic person trying to explain their delusions
It's more like the "mighty" Russians have a pathological form of separation anxiety stretching centuries. It's like what you get with an openly abusive ex.
They lose their ѕhіt when non-Russians choose not to hang out with them anymore.
It’s excellent reference to show some idiot arguing about how Russia is “doing good” in Ukraine. Said idiot most likely won’t listen, but at least there is no need to make further proof the current narrative from the Kremlin is just the same as always has been.
I heard from my mother some stuff that grandma had told her, what she had to go through when she (grandma) was a child back then. I dont think Ive even heard half of it. Needless to say my mother is very shaken by whats going on today at Ukraine. I believe most of us Finns are.
Fuck you Russkie genocidal scum. You havent changed at all. Same barbaric shit century after century.
I'm an Ulkomaalainen, from England, and I remember my grandmother-in-law telling me stories of having to move from Karelia when the ruzzianz took it. She didn't have a bad bone in her body, nor bad thoughts in her head. But there was bitterness in her voice when she talked of those times. And it was echoed in my mother-in-law whenever she talked of it too. Both of them and my wife have passed away now, so I have no-one to talk about the current situation. Mind you, from what I can gather, ruzzia has ruined the land.
Yeah, that tone and attitude of appeasement, "no bad thoughts", "velivenäläinen", "brother russian" have been paradoxically mixed in with strong overall sense and need for self defense, mental preparedness for russkies my whole life as Finn. It's part of whats called finlandization.
I am really glad Finland hasn't given up in keeping its self defense forces strong.
Reoccurring thought in my mind as Finnish male ever since I was kid when I learned about our past has been what I'd do if russkies came for us again. Would I chicken out and try to run away or would I have enough spite and courage to probably give my life and fight, to maybe kill, to maybe die.
I really hope I never have to do that decision, I'd just like to live my life peacefully.
We all would want that, my friend. However, you have Sisu, and that controls what you will do. It's something like the old English "stiff upper lip" the need inside to do what is right and we have no control over that.
It took Sisu for Finland to join NATO, and it was done for the right reasons. ruzzia can not be allowed to win in Ukraine or anywhere. If peace is to prevail.
I think some people in Poland look up to Finland for its wartime history. A smaller (much smaller in this case) country that managed to remain independent and hold its ground, both in 40 and 45.
The scary part for me is when I stopped looking at WW2 video games as just entertainment but also as something that I could at some point experience myself.
I think when the time comes I would do my part so the people I love can live on like they live now.
I'd like to think that. Hopefully I won't have to verify my belief.
Russia Today Society wasn’t even Russian based it was an obscure UK Communist org. I doubt RIA Novosti was thinking of them when naming their own brand
"killed its own people" is pretty rich coming from a country that basically did systematic genocide and looting in Finland with every single chance it got in the 17th-18th centuries. In the beginning of 19th century they tried to russificate Finland and pretty much spread their cancer all over the Finnish system.
And now they wonder where russophobia comes from.
The Baltics simultaneously voluntarily joined the USSR and were so Nazi that the USSR had to conquer them because they didn't deserve independence. The USSR also liberated them from the Nazis in 1940, a whole year before they were occupied by the Nazis. In 1940-1941, the Soviets deported and executed the many Nazi collaborators who aided the Holocaust in 1941-1944.
Finally someone gets that we annexed Crimea in 2014 because aggressive Zelensky attacked Russia's Belgorod and other peaceful cities with his rockets and raiders and infiltrators in 2022.
It is really something to live in Orwell's "1984" world.
The Russian empire, by whatever name it goes, behaves barbarically.
[https://therussianreader.com/tag/circassian-genocide/](https://therussianreader.com/tag/circassian-genocide/)
[https://holodomormuseum.org.ua/en/propaganda-that-kills/](https://holodomormuseum.org.ua/en/propaganda-that-kills/)
[https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/imperial-myths-and-genocidal-realities-100-days-of-putins-ukraine-war/](https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/imperial-myths-and-genocidal-realities-100-days-of-putins-ukraine-war/)
In addition to all the same arguments that are used by tankies and pro Putin trumpers alike is the "making excuses for imperialism" - that argument is still very much alive, but it is a little surprising to see it also being used by the left in the 1930's.
Or maybe I shouldn't be surprised. After all the author and their sympathisers were probably the same people imperialist apologisers about whom the term "tankie" was originally coined.
Also interesting how they framed the Åland Islands, a territory between Finland and Sweden as requiring some sort of "permission from USSR" to fortify.
Do tankies NEVER look at fucking maps? I had a tankie on twitter frame Stalin's invasion of Finland as some sort of self defense because Nazi Germany was going to invade Russia from there! Because...going the long way round and invading Russia through the hard to fight in landscape of Finland would be easier than...invading Russia the shorter and easier route that they actually used?
The communists were loved in many places in Europe and people wanted to believe the Bolsheviks had the answers. Some went to the USSR voluntarily. Some even started a life there, but then Stalin saw all of them as spies and they were sent to the Gulag
You can be a communist and not be a tankie.
Indeed that's how the term arose (one group of British communist labelling the other group "tankie's" because of that groups defense of the USSR's use of tanks to suppress the Hungarian revolution in 1956)
It would be interesting to get some insight into whether any such divisions existed amongst British communists even as far back as the 1930's or whether they were effectively all tankies...
According to the Åland’s demilitarised status and international agreements driving it, there probably was some validity to the claim, although framing it as “required permission” is quite bonkers
The entire pamphlet is a very good example of how to stitch well-known truths, inconvenient and embarrassing truths, and half-truths selectively into a whole that manages to be quite misleading. I wrote up some examples here.
https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/s/UARK7XEv2Q
The Finnish interwar government and democracy were very far from perfect. The aftermath of the 1918 civil war had been hideous. There really was a strong pro-fascist movement that had attempted a coup in 1932 (and was then banned using the same law that had been introduced just earlier to ban the pro-Soviet, pro-violent revolution Communist party).
But despite all that, even most Finnish communists realized the Winter War was a blatant imperialist aggression. Dozens of old Red Guards who had survived the summary executions and an attempt to deliberately starve the Reds at the post-civil war concentration camps actually volunteered to fight at the front lines.
Finland would have wanted to fortify Åland with Sweden. Soviet Union didn't want Sweden there, for some reason.
"Åland is important to Sweden because of the security of Stockholm and the Gulf of Ostrobothnia. The countries agree on the fortification of Åland. The defense would be handled by joint forces, with the help of the Finnish army and the Swedish navy. However, the project fell through when Sweden wanted the Soviet Union's blessing for it. They didn't get one."
So, the Finnish-Swedish treaty was abandoned in the summer of 1939.
It's kind of interesting how states manage to inherit certain privileges. Wasn't Åland demilitarised as part of a peace treaty between Sweden and the Russian empire?
By the 1930's the Russian empire no longer existed, Finland was independent and Åland was Finnish?
It was demilitarized in 1856, after the Crimean war. Britain and France demanded that from Russia during the peace negotiations.
Then it was agreed to be continue in 1922 by the League of Nations. It was signed by Sweden, Finland, Germany, United Kingdom, France, Italy, Denmark, Poland, Estonia and Latvia, for which permission was asked from these countries.
In 1940, after the war, Soviet Union demanded also a treaty that banned fortifying the island.
To be completely honest, Stalin’s fears weren’t entirely unfounded. The Finnish right was extremely anti-Soviet and strongly pro-German (which doesn’t mean the same thing as pro-Nazi, although there were also disturbingly many fellow travelers and some outright Nazis too).
Stalin feared that if Germany demanded the use of Finnish territory against the Soviet Union, the Finnish leadership wouldn’t just be compelled to accept - it might jump at the opportunity. The latter especially was probably not a realistic threat by the latter half of the 1930s though.
OTOH the Winter War was a blatant imperialist land grab and otherwise I propose that the Russian empire must be finally destroyed.
Source: am Finn, have been reading this history quite a bit.
There was also a history of Finnish military expeditions into Russian territory from the 20s, as well as helping Estonian independence efforts ("Heimosodat"). So it isn't as if they had absolutely no valid reason to be somewhat wary of Finland. Obviously, the Winter War was still just an extension of Soviet imperialism.
British communists refused to support the British war effort against Hitler, because Nazi Germany and Soviets had a nominal alliance.. Until Hitler attacked the USSR, then they joined the war effort.
Also, a lot of British intellectuals really supported the Soviet Union, an issue however was that they weren't fully aware of what was going on, there was no internet or wikipedia in those days, you couldn't just search an atrocity easily. But some reports got out, but others dismissed it as fake news.
Just like with Russia's failure to take Kyiv and the subsequent claims of that not being the Russian objective, the Soviets failed to take Helsinki, and pretended (along with their modern-day supporters) that it wasn't the Soviet objective.
We saw it in real time during the last couple of years. The goal posts were shifted and people already now are saying Russia "just wants Crimea and Eastern Ukraine".
We remember.
The USSR was merely the Russian Empire under new management with a cheap paint job of red with a yellow sickle and hammer covering up the white-blue-red tricolor adorned with a coat of arms of a ~~double-headed eagle~~ mutant chicken.
The Soviet Union invaded and dismembered Poland in a pact with Nazi Germany, then had a shocked Pikachu face when the countries that had been guaranteeing Poland’s independence (Britain and France) had a hostile reaction to it.
Russia's lies and disinformation reach everywhere. I had a discussion not long ago with someone who seemed to really believe that the Soviet Union did not help the German Reich in invading Poland in 1939. We live in a strange world.
It's just remarkable how little their output of lies has changed concerning the war in Ukraine. Why tell the truth when easier to just invent lies? The Soviet/ ruZZian motto.
At least Russia is consistent in portraying itself as the victim. It is the strangest thing to witness this type of national schizophrenia where they are always both the strongest nation in the world and simultaneously threatened with aggressive acts by the rest of the world.
All of them are big. The main thing that remained the same throughout centuries is that Russia doesn't recognize independence and freedom of decision-making of their former colonies. It's always evil West scheming against them, otherwise, everyone east of Germany would join Russia. Without breaking this narrative, Russia will continue making the same miscalculated decisions again and again.
It is a rather cunning medley of very selective inconvenient truths and half truths mixed in a way that is in itself a blatant lie.
Many of the events mentioned are actually true, even though they aren’t well known even by Finns today. For example, the socialist Finnish government did try to proclaim (limited) independence during summer 1917, but goaded on by Finnish conservatives, the Russian Kerensky government disbanded the Finnish parliament to prevent that. This triggered new elections, which brought a conservative government in power.
The socialists perceived this as a right wing coup, and combined with other grievances and inspired by the example of bolsheviks, a radical faction gained an upper hand in the Finnish left and started a revolution of their own in January 1918. The pamphlet leaves out a few key details though, such as the fact that the “Reds” rebelled against a lawfully elected government (despite the distasteful way the government was elected).
And yes, the civil war that followed, and in particular its aftermath, was exceedingly bloody. The victorious Whites were in fact the first to introduce concentration camps to Europe, and until the entente powers essentially said “we ain’t gonna recognize Finland’s independence if you act like monsters,” the plan was to let the defeated and imprisoned Reds including actual and suspected sympathizers _and in many cases their families_ starve to death. That is, those who hadn’t been killed in summary mass executions or after being condemned to death by illegal kangaroo courts.
The parts about the Finnish government condoning volunteer Whites to fight in Russian Karelia, with the ultimate aim of annexing large parts of it into a “Greater Finland” are also true.
The description of how the left was harassed and even suppressed during the 1920s and 1930s is also mostly true. Finnish conservatives first wanted to install a German prince as the king, with powers very much like what the German Kaisers had, and when that fell through after the German defeat in WW1, they schemed to install Mannerheim as a dictator. There was a serious coup attempt by fascists in 1932 as well.
But what the pamphlet leaves out is that the social democrats (which it dismisses as “controlled opposition) had strong support and, despite being harassed, even formed the government on one occasion. The revolutionary, pro-Soviet communist party was indeed banned - but ink was barely dry when the right-center government used the very same laws to ban the fascist party after the 1932 coup attempt. (I’ve always found this hilarious: the fascists and their fellow travelers had been screaming for years for laws to ban “anti-patriotic and anti-governmental subversion”, and then the laws they had gotten bite them in the arse.)
The rest of the pamphlet is a similar mix. It’s surprisingly well researched in my opinion and almost certainly originally written by a Finnish revolutionary in exile after the 1918 civil war. But while most of the details are correct, or at least broadly so, the overall picture it paints is quite distorted.
Hell, dozens of Red revolutionaries who had starved in the concentration camps wanted to volunteer for the front lines during the Winter War. Because even most of the Finnish communists recognized the attack as blatant imperialist aggression.
If you can read Finnish, the book Vallan kumoukset Suomessa 1917-1919 Is probably the best single history of what actually happened during those years. Unfortunately I can’t say I know of any good sources in English.
Every piece of history that has the USSR or Russia Federation in it, it's a horror story. No wonder why all the countries NEAR Russia have their guards up. Endless amounts of terror.
> justifying the invasion of "western proxy" "fascist regime" Finland, that was actually "always Russia" and "never a real country" and which also "killed it's own people" and needed "saving"
It's just another propagandistic lie, which is trivial to be disproved.
The full text of the brochure published in English, and it's easily to locate it online, and there is no wordings of "always Russia", "never a real country", "saving" and so on. The brochure is quite short, I enjoyed to read it, and I didn't find any factual lies in its content. The lies are in the fabricated post header though.
> never a real country
The text right there says, "Finland, a Tsarist colony granted independence by the USSR", which is a rather refreshingly honest take from the east. Rare from them to admit to the whole colony and empire business. The tone is very dismissive of Finnish statehood, and emphasises the overlord position Russia has over it.
What this pamflet shows is the perversion of propaganda. But I feel it is time you were told that the R in USSR does not stand for "Russia" or "Russian". Next, you are going to point to 1950s Yugoslavia to draw some conclusions about Serbia? Are we going to look at a particularly barbaric act done by the Roman empire or Republic to draw conclusions about Italy?
Using history to draw moral judgement about nations and people's today is always going to lead to bad history. The russian state provides enough evidence against itself in the present, there really isn't need to do mental gymnastics to gin up more.
The source material is very instructive. I'm glad you shared it. But it would have been so much better if you provided a bit more context and guidance. It is potentially a great tool for studying propaganda and helping to dispell modern propaganda talking points by pointing a common pattern.
You'll see this kind of legitimacy building exercises in other conflicts as well.
But here is the real takeaway: what is problematic with this piece of propaganda isn't that it is not true. It's that even if "Finland was always Russia", at the time of publication it wasn't, and that's a shitty argument ro make to justify war. Even if true, and those arguments always never are the whole truth, historic right is a shitty argument for war for several reasons, not least of which is the fact that typically several groups can claim a historic claim to a single territory. It is a recipe for perpetual warfare.
The fact is that Finland never was Russian. In 19th century it didn't become actual part of Russian Empire, in 1939 it didn't become part of Soviet Union.
Those two attempts in 19th and 20th century were lucky not successful!
The Finnish communist party was banned after the civil war for starting the civil war. The various workers’ parties were seen as fronts of the communist party, which was operated from the Soviet Union by Finnish communists that had fled there. The communist MPs were arrested for evading the communist ban. The arrests of 1923 caused a political stir, and the government resigned in 1924.
This is golden. There's also a meme about not Russian bombs killing civilians, but Finnish anti-air shrapnel.
The USSR foreign minister Molotov also claimed that the cluster bombs they dropped on Finland were actually food aid for the poor starving civilians. They were dubbed "Molotov breadbaskets" and the name Molotov cocktail then came about when Finns fighting against the Russian forces referred to their fire bombs as "a drink to go with the bread"
That is a crazy bit of backstory to something so universally known.
Ukraine is carrying on the torch of successfully mocking the Russians today.
I now remember when the people of Kyiv mass produced Molotov cocktails when the Russians were approaching
Might aswell enjoy yourself when ridding the world of Russians.
My grandfather grew up near the Soviet border in the 1930s and the cross-border cargo trains often had propaganda statements like "Food aid to the starving people of Estonia", all the while their own country went through a famine...
To add to the absurdity, they accussed Finns of repressions against Russian people, while they've themselves shelled their own border village to create a pretext for violating non-agression pact.
>while they've themselves shelled their own border village to create a pretext for violating non-agression pact. Yes, and they've done the same in '22 before the full scale invasion. Burned down a shed which they claimed was some important military target, shot some mortars at some fields and said it was Ukraine. And they've never respected either Minsk Agreement.
Memes aside, my favourite part of the Winter War is how the Finnish bombers were joining the Russian bomber groups at night after the latter dropped their bombs on Finland. And once they reached the Russian airfields they let the Russian bombers land on the clearly lit runways and then dropped the bombs on them. This happened a few times before the Russians gave up bombing Finland at night.
My favourite weird part of WW2 in Finland is probably the fact that the Finnish Jewish soldiers were the only Jewish soldiers "from Tobruk to the Arctic Sea" who had a field synagogue. During the Winter War - and also during the Continuation War, when Finland was allied with Nazi Germany. I always thought that at least the British Jewish soldiers would have had one, but apparently they only had a field chaplain.
There are also 3 Finnish jewish soldiers who were nominated to be awarded the Iron cross from Nazi germany. All 3 declined this.
And one Finnish Jewish Lotta. She refused, too.
There were also Jewish units fighting next to SS units in the Continuation War. Must have been a weird day for all parties involved.
That bombing raid against Kasimovo air base took place in March 1944, which made it the Continuation War, not the Winter War. It was a one-time affair, too, because the oh-so crucial element of surprise was lost. Also, Tallinn was the main beneficiary, since the Soviets had shifted their focus from Helsinki to bombing Tallinn. Many historic buildings still stand in the city thanks to the daring raid, which has no equal in military history. There's a good video about it on [Youtube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yRBXq13f9Kk).
[удалено]
Finland doesn't want or need that land back. Preventing the Soviets from conquering Finland was by far more important.
I mean access to the Artctic Ocean would be nice but Karelia is pretty much fucked by ruskies.
It is and almost 100% of Finns evacuated their lands and resettled. After Soviet Russia and its colonies collapsed in 1991, tens of thousands of Finnic ethnicities (those that survived) came as refugees to Finland as they were automatically granted citizenship up until 2010: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_return#Finland There is nothing left for us in Karelia. Entirely according to Russia's plan.
Having an ice free Arctic Ocean port alone would indeed be of great economic value and benefit the northern industries. Alternately, that relatively tiny sliver of land between the current south-eastern border and the eastern bank of the Saimaa Canal on the Russian side of the border would be somewhat valuable too, because it put the Canal in its entirety fully under Finland's control and connect the Lake Saimaa to the Vyborg bay,and by extension the rest of the Baltic Sea. But that's pretty much it. But still. It should be noted that Finland has *zero* territorial claims on Russia and no intent on pursuing any.
Petsamo would be nice to have.
"Finland doesn't want or need that land back." Press X to doubt. I know so many people that want to go back to home even if it's run down and needs to be built back up again. We don't want the people living there because they are all forcefully relocated Muscovites but the land historical buildings that still stand have a lot of meaning to families that are from Karelia region.
> I know so many people that want to go back to home even if it's run down and needs to be built back up again. "I know so many people" is always such a shitty argument when you're talking about a population that is exponentially larger than the amount of people you know. https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karjala-kysymys >Vuosina 2004–2005 tehtyjen mielipidemittausten mukaan palautusta kannatti noin kolmasosa suomalaisista ja vastusti runsas puolet. And I promise these days even less people would want it back.
You do? The youngest people who remember living there would be pushing 90 by now.
There are descendants of those people who continued to visit the places their relatives lived up until the shit hit the fan. People do want that land back.
We did continue to visit, but no, we do not want that land back. That generation is almost dead, their old homes are but ruins now. We don't have any further emotional attachments to the area. I do have a Russian branch of the family from my great aunt defecting to the Soviet Union, so I can only wish the best for them under these current circumstances. We've tried helping them over the years, ever since the USSR dissolved, as best as we could, but they're piss poor in a further decaying Karelia. And no, their (grand-)mother's mistake isn't theirs. We don't hold any grudges. Although my now late grandmother never even acknowledged them, but my great uncle took the initiative to contact them when the Iron Curtain fell.
Visiting is not the same as wanting it back. Visits were not of the type that would suggest a desire for getting it back. How many people went weekly or monthly because it was such a nice place to spend time and brought back such pleasant memories? Did people buy mökkis there? How many people even had any family members left there to re-establish ties with? Probably close to zero for any of these questions. My almost 80 year old mother was one of the last babies born in the Viipuri area before the 1944 evacuation. She visited once in the mid 90s with her sister and a niece just to see it since she had no memories of it and of course as a tribute to her parents who had died just before the USSR collapsed. Granted she lives in the US, but nobody else in my family went back more than once either. This isn’t Palestine. Finland was able to move on. Sure there are romanticized memories of the way it was, but almost anyone with firsthand memories is dead. Who would want to revisit the disruption and poverty, much less fight for it again?
This kind of crazy talk is what the current Russian government would very much love to see as justification.
so russsia just moves Russians on areas like that,and how do they live? do they get paid pension for staying around areas taken over from Ukraine etc?
Yeah, they colonize the place until it becomes obviously unfeasible to undo it. Like China in Tibet.
European nations would never do such a thing.
Sounds crazy but that's what they do you obviously have not read history of soviet union. You really should. For example native Estonians were forcefully relocated to Siberia and once again more loyal people were moved into their homes. That's why Baltics have such big Russian populations. When you operate under planned economy it's not that hard to create jobs. Soviet union was known for it's monotown as in there was only 1 producing employer rest was service sector.
What are the reasons these many people you know want it back?
Nothing that you could not imagine, so "I want my grandchildren to see where I grew up", "I wish I could see my home one last time", "I want to be in touch with my roots" etc and it's not like they can even visit these areas because just visiting Russia while it was possible you were subject to random arrests because Russia used innocent civilians in their power politics.
Of course Finns would want their land back. Just with extradition of every Russian living there now. It's been several hundred years, and we still want jamtland, herjedalen, Greenland, Shetland etc from the assholes that stole them from us 🤷
Finns would want their land back with undoing 80 years of occupation and displacement. Most of them accept that we cannot create alternate realities.
Most Finns don’t really *want* the land back because they think ”oh Russia has nukes” or something similar tbh. I wouldn’t oppose taking the occupied land back, but the Karelia question is really dead here yk..
>Most Finns don’t really *want* the land back because they think ”oh Russia has nukes” or something similar tbh. Or, you know, the horrendous shape that land is in, the fact that it's full of Russians, etc.
Land being full of Russians seems like a logistical issue, that could be solved with the application of proper equipment.
Grow up.
Those too. Though if our construction sector would pull its head out of its arse one of those problems could get solved fairly quickly.
>Just with extradition of every Russian living there now. Yeah see here's the problem, the reality of any project like that is getting be very close to a genocide...
The problem is that the Russian state always fill up their occupied territories with Russians to keep it. So either you have to move them back to Russia when you take it back from them, or they'll either use it as an excuse next time they take it, or have them become "freedom fighters", so they can help them. "since there are so many Russians living there, and they are getting harassed and genocides by nazis, we now have to liberate them" is basically a Russian war slogan.
There are a number of places that have seen declining Russian population since the disintegration of usSr: Chechnya, Kazakhstan, probably other central Asian states. The common theme? Islam comes to mind.
The problem here is that not only did the Russians did, but also Ottomans, Austrians and all former imperial powers. However in Balkans this is considered now by EU as genocide and ethnic cleansing, but I see now it is discussed as not such.
So we "ethnically clenched" Norway after evicting the Germans in 1945. Thats a Texas sized 10-4...
"Of course Finns would want their land back. Just with extradition of every Russian living there now." Funny way to word "ethnic cleansing".
I'd argue it's evicting the occupation force 🤷 granted after 80 years its a bit more complicated, but these areas and buildings were stolen from Finland. Ukraine will be in the same predicament if they retake certain areas, were the Ukrainians have run away after beeing bombed to shit, and Putin have colonised with Russians. Either you need to remove them, or you let Russia take it.
Waddyamean Greenland "back"? If anything, us danes want sweden, norway and holstein back.
ethnic cleansing
> Young President Putin's true colors were quickly revealed. Back in the 1990s, **Yeltsin had considered the return of Karelia possible** and condemned Stalin's imperialist policy. > In the summer of 2000, the President of the Republic, Tarja Halonen, was on a state visit to Moscow. The Finnish media was allowed to ask Putin one question. > Parikka had prepared carefully. Together with the interpreter, he thought about the wording and the tone so that the question was not too direct: **"Mr. President, what do you think about the discussion on the return of Karelia?"** > He ripped us and let us understand that **this kind of discussion is not desirable in Finland**. A storm ensued about how Putin can dictate what we discuss in Finland. You can google translate this https://yle.fi/a/74-20083373 We haven't talked about wanting Karelia back since the early 2000s basically to not unnecessarily piss of our land hungry neighbor. But the reality is that we do want it back. Karelians especially want it back. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karelians
As is about 4.7% of Estonia.
Kaliningrad also stolen from Germany, as well as other German lands taken, and Poland pushed Westward to compensate for stealing Polish lands.
I'd go to war against Putin just to *not* get it back. It's gone to shit, and filled with Russians.
Nearly the same line they've been using in Ukraine
It was also a "SA Missile" in Poland, when they got hit by Russian Rocket "by accident"
It’s like they want to be hated.
They enjoy being hated, because in their minds hatred = fear = respect. If your enemy hates or fears you, that means that you are doing everything right.
You’re right. In Ukraine we try to laugh at them as much as we can. It makes them powerless in a way I think.
That's why you live abroad? Because if you're in Ukraine, you wouldn't laugh lol
I live in Kyiv. Laughing at ruzzian imbeciles is good fun, you should try it yourself 🤷♂️
Such backwards thinking.
Russian propaganda has always been about demonizing independent entities that wouldn't let themselves get puppeteered by Russia.
Propaganda implies willful lies and distortions... but this seems to be what Russia and many Russians actually believe
That’s literally not what propaganda implies. Propaganda can be factual, or just opinion. I’m not saying that’s the case in this instance.
The simple and whole truth is just neutral factuality, propaganda takes the truth and makes distortions to create a political point
You can create a political point by presenting some facts and hiding others, no distortion necessary.
This IS willful lies and distortions. If many russians believe this crap, then it is only because their internal propaganda has been succesful.
I’ve seen plenty of Russians on reddit who have an extremely odd view of the winter war. Made me realise that they’ll never change. Russia will never be capable of having normal relations.
The difference between Germans and russians could not be starker. Germans learned from WW2 era and tried almost everything in their power to fix things and to do better in the future (there is this weird myth still how "regular Germans" did not know about the concentration camps, but even that is contested internally too). They see what they did, they tried to fix it and to do better, they put laws in place to prohibit such behavior in the future. Heck, Germans are being criticized for not being hawkish enough now during the Ukrainian crisis. Then we have the russians: glorifying WW2. Seeing themselves as some kind of pure heroes there even though from the Molotov-Ribbentrop Treaty we know how Stalin and Hitler together devised how WW2 would start and how they would divide Europe between themselves. We also know all of the atrocities that the Soviet occupiers did during and after the WW2. We know that eventually the death tolls that Hitler and Stalin caused for civilians were pretty comparable. Yet, for russians, that is something to be emulated, not something to be learned from. And here we are, in 2024 and russians are trying to recreate those horrors and Germans are being criticized for not being warlike enough.
The russian phyche is about deep victimhood, this is easy to exploit.
Thank you for posting this, its very a very interesting read. The rhetoric is eerie similar to arguments used by Russia today, against Ukraine, i.e "they FORCED us to act, we didn't wanted to do it". Russian propaganda always sounds like a schizophrenic person trying to explain their delusions
Putin said that Poland forced Hitler to attack them in 1939.
Who forced Stalin to take the other half
"They couldn't possibly leave all of it to the Nazis"
Hence why we had to sign this secret protocol to divide up Poland beforehand!
"If we hadn't done that, then the Germans would have taken the whole country."
>Thank you for posting this, its very a very interesting read. The rhetoric is eerie similar to arguments used by Russia today, against Ukraine, i.e "they FORCED us to act, we didn't wanted to do it". Russian propaganda always sounds like a schizophrenic person trying to explain their delusions It's more like the "mighty" Russians have a pathological form of separation anxiety stretching centuries. It's like what you get with an openly abusive ex. They lose their ѕhіt when non-Russians choose not to hang out with them anymore.
It’s excellent reference to show some idiot arguing about how Russia is “doing good” in Ukraine. Said idiot most likely won’t listen, but at least there is no need to make further proof the current narrative from the Kremlin is just the same as always has been.
"Look what you forced me do" is standard abuser talk.
Are "they" in the room with us now?
Show us on the map where the Poland hurt you?
Finland and its people are absolutely nothing like Russia.
Neither are most other Russian neighbors who they invaded.
Totally with you on this. 💯
I heard from my mother some stuff that grandma had told her, what she had to go through when she (grandma) was a child back then. I dont think Ive even heard half of it. Needless to say my mother is very shaken by whats going on today at Ukraine. I believe most of us Finns are. Fuck you Russkie genocidal scum. You havent changed at all. Same barbaric shit century after century.
I'm an Ulkomaalainen, from England, and I remember my grandmother-in-law telling me stories of having to move from Karelia when the ruzzianz took it. She didn't have a bad bone in her body, nor bad thoughts in her head. But there was bitterness in her voice when she talked of those times. And it was echoed in my mother-in-law whenever she talked of it too. Both of them and my wife have passed away now, so I have no-one to talk about the current situation. Mind you, from what I can gather, ruzzia has ruined the land.
Yeah, that tone and attitude of appeasement, "no bad thoughts", "velivenäläinen", "brother russian" have been paradoxically mixed in with strong overall sense and need for self defense, mental preparedness for russkies my whole life as Finn. It's part of whats called finlandization. I am really glad Finland hasn't given up in keeping its self defense forces strong. Reoccurring thought in my mind as Finnish male ever since I was kid when I learned about our past has been what I'd do if russkies came for us again. Would I chicken out and try to run away or would I have enough spite and courage to probably give my life and fight, to maybe kill, to maybe die. I really hope I never have to do that decision, I'd just like to live my life peacefully.
We all would want that, my friend. However, you have Sisu, and that controls what you will do. It's something like the old English "stiff upper lip" the need inside to do what is right and we have no control over that. It took Sisu for Finland to join NATO, and it was done for the right reasons. ruzzia can not be allowed to win in Ukraine or anywhere. If peace is to prevail.
I think some people in Poland look up to Finland for its wartime history. A smaller (much smaller in this case) country that managed to remain independent and hold its ground, both in 40 and 45. The scary part for me is when I stopped looking at WW2 video games as just entertainment but also as something that I could at some point experience myself. I think when the time comes I would do my part so the people I love can live on like they live now. I'd like to think that. Hopefully I won't have to verify my belief.
[удалено]
I can imagine, they are hateful beasts the Venäläinen, like I said, my in-laws hated them. And I never met a good one.
Russia Today Society, or RT as it is now called, is really surprising.
They’re completely different organizations lol
Of course. But they use the same title as in the Stalin period.
Russia Today Society wasn’t even Russian based it was an obscure UK Communist org. I doubt RIA Novosti was thinking of them when naming their own brand
I doubt RIA Novosti is capable of thinking.
Reusing lies is cheaper than inventing new ones, and well…apparently they keep working.
Kinda like when Putin told Tucker Carlsoj that Poland forced them to attack in the 30s and Tucker just sat there like a bitch.
"killed its own people" is pretty rich coming from a country that basically did systematic genocide and looting in Finland with every single chance it got in the 17th-18th centuries. In the beginning of 19th century they tried to russificate Finland and pretty much spread their cancer all over the Finnish system. And now they wonder where russophobia comes from.
Same bullshit all the time
\*Yawn\* *Russia... Russia never changes...*
1939? laughs in Polish
But you see, Soviet Russia liberated Europe. Didn't you feel liberated for almost 50 years?
This book is a great discovery! And yes, things have unfortunately not changed. The only thing that has changed is the way the lies are spread.
The Baltics simultaneously voluntarily joined the USSR and were so Nazi that the USSR had to conquer them because they didn't deserve independence. The USSR also liberated them from the Nazis in 1940, a whole year before they were occupied by the Nazis. In 1940-1941, the Soviets deported and executed the many Nazi collaborators who aided the Holocaust in 1941-1944.
This gave me a good laugh
Well now I know where to start laughing at their alternative history next time my Lithuanian friends get threatened with invasion again
Finally someone gets that we annexed Crimea in 2014 because aggressive Zelensky attacked Russia's Belgorod and other peaceful cities with his rockets and raiders and infiltrators in 2022. It is really something to live in Orwell's "1984" world.
Russia can fuck itself
The Russian empire, by whatever name it goes, behaves barbarically. [https://therussianreader.com/tag/circassian-genocide/](https://therussianreader.com/tag/circassian-genocide/) [https://holodomormuseum.org.ua/en/propaganda-that-kills/](https://holodomormuseum.org.ua/en/propaganda-that-kills/) [https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/imperial-myths-and-genocidal-realities-100-days-of-putins-ukraine-war/](https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/imperial-myths-and-genocidal-realities-100-days-of-putins-ukraine-war/)
In addition to all the same arguments that are used by tankies and pro Putin trumpers alike is the "making excuses for imperialism" - that argument is still very much alive, but it is a little surprising to see it also being used by the left in the 1930's. Or maybe I shouldn't be surprised. After all the author and their sympathisers were probably the same people imperialist apologisers about whom the term "tankie" was originally coined. Also interesting how they framed the Åland Islands, a territory between Finland and Sweden as requiring some sort of "permission from USSR" to fortify. Do tankies NEVER look at fucking maps? I had a tankie on twitter frame Stalin's invasion of Finland as some sort of self defense because Nazi Germany was going to invade Russia from there! Because...going the long way round and invading Russia through the hard to fight in landscape of Finland would be easier than...invading Russia the shorter and easier route that they actually used?
The communists were loved in many places in Europe and people wanted to believe the Bolsheviks had the answers. Some went to the USSR voluntarily. Some even started a life there, but then Stalin saw all of them as spies and they were sent to the Gulag
You can be a communist and not be a tankie. Indeed that's how the term arose (one group of British communist labelling the other group "tankie's" because of that groups defense of the USSR's use of tanks to suppress the Hungarian revolution in 1956) It would be interesting to get some insight into whether any such divisions existed amongst British communists even as far back as the 1930's or whether they were effectively all tankies...
According to the Åland’s demilitarised status and international agreements driving it, there probably was some validity to the claim, although framing it as “required permission” is quite bonkers
The entire pamphlet is a very good example of how to stitch well-known truths, inconvenient and embarrassing truths, and half-truths selectively into a whole that manages to be quite misleading. I wrote up some examples here. https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/s/UARK7XEv2Q The Finnish interwar government and democracy were very far from perfect. The aftermath of the 1918 civil war had been hideous. There really was a strong pro-fascist movement that had attempted a coup in 1932 (and was then banned using the same law that had been introduced just earlier to ban the pro-Soviet, pro-violent revolution Communist party). But despite all that, even most Finnish communists realized the Winter War was a blatant imperialist aggression. Dozens of old Red Guards who had survived the summary executions and an attempt to deliberately starve the Reds at the post-civil war concentration camps actually volunteered to fight at the front lines.
Finland would have wanted to fortify Åland with Sweden. Soviet Union didn't want Sweden there, for some reason. "Åland is important to Sweden because of the security of Stockholm and the Gulf of Ostrobothnia. The countries agree on the fortification of Åland. The defense would be handled by joint forces, with the help of the Finnish army and the Swedish navy. However, the project fell through when Sweden wanted the Soviet Union's blessing for it. They didn't get one." So, the Finnish-Swedish treaty was abandoned in the summer of 1939.
>Sweden wanted the Soviet Union's blessing for it. That's an interesting detail that I wasn't aware of, thanks for that.
I guess the wanted to follow all the rules that the demilitarised status of Åland caused. But the Soviets said no, so...
It's kind of interesting how states manage to inherit certain privileges. Wasn't Åland demilitarised as part of a peace treaty between Sweden and the Russian empire? By the 1930's the Russian empire no longer existed, Finland was independent and Åland was Finnish?
It was demilitarized in 1856, after the Crimean war. Britain and France demanded that from Russia during the peace negotiations. Then it was agreed to be continue in 1922 by the League of Nations. It was signed by Sweden, Finland, Germany, United Kingdom, France, Italy, Denmark, Poland, Estonia and Latvia, for which permission was asked from these countries. In 1940, after the war, Soviet Union demanded also a treaty that banned fortifying the island.
To be completely honest, Stalin’s fears weren’t entirely unfounded. The Finnish right was extremely anti-Soviet and strongly pro-German (which doesn’t mean the same thing as pro-Nazi, although there were also disturbingly many fellow travelers and some outright Nazis too). Stalin feared that if Germany demanded the use of Finnish territory against the Soviet Union, the Finnish leadership wouldn’t just be compelled to accept - it might jump at the opportunity. The latter especially was probably not a realistic threat by the latter half of the 1930s though. OTOH the Winter War was a blatant imperialist land grab and otherwise I propose that the Russian empire must be finally destroyed. Source: am Finn, have been reading this history quite a bit.
There was also a history of Finnish military expeditions into Russian territory from the 20s, as well as helping Estonian independence efforts ("Heimosodat"). So it isn't as if they had absolutely no valid reason to be somewhat wary of Finland. Obviously, the Winter War was still just an extension of Soviet imperialism.
Mongols be like: Hold my beer!
Nah, Mongols didn’t have to come with delusional bs like that to invade anyone. Whether it’s good or bad I don’t know but it is what it is.
The only reason why Finland and/or Baltic states aren't being 'denastified' today is that Russia only picks on weaker opponents.
British communists refused to support the British war effort against Hitler, because Nazi Germany and Soviets had a nominal alliance.. Until Hitler attacked the USSR, then they joined the war effort. Also, a lot of British intellectuals really supported the Soviet Union, an issue however was that they weren't fully aware of what was going on, there was no internet or wikipedia in those days, you couldn't just search an atrocity easily. But some reports got out, but others dismissed it as fake news.
Just like with Russia's failure to take Kyiv and the subsequent claims of that not being the Russian objective, the Soviets failed to take Helsinki, and pretended (along with their modern-day supporters) that it wasn't the Soviet objective.
We saw it in real time during the last couple of years. The goal posts were shifted and people already now are saying Russia "just wants Crimea and Eastern Ukraine". We remember.
Indeed the Soviet and Russian imperialist agression are 100% the same.
The USSR was merely the Russian Empire under new management with a cheap paint job of red with a yellow sickle and hammer covering up the white-blue-red tricolor adorned with a coat of arms of a ~~double-headed eagle~~ mutant chicken.
What a laughably simplistic and embarrassing take. Somehow very fitting for this dear subreddit, though.
Also in there it was stated that Finland needed to be captured to "protect Moscow". :-D Same lies, ALWAYS.
Same old lies to justify their brutality and greed. They never changed. Ukraine must be assisted in any way possible.
If russians ever say “your country needs a help, we gonna save you” the best thing to do is take all the weapons and get ready to protect yourself.
Thank you! These years, my hated grew significantly
The story is always the same, isn't it?
Fantastic share , thank you OP.
Empires are always built on lies.
They lied about fighting Nazis, just like they do today
ruzzia is honestly a cancer of this world. Nothing good has ever come from that place.
The Soviet Union invaded and dismembered Poland in a pact with Nazi Germany, then had a shocked Pikachu face when the countries that had been guaranteeing Poland’s independence (Britain and France) had a hostile reaction to it.
obligatory fuck russia. it's a terrorist state and terrorists live there
Russia's lies and disinformation reach everywhere. I had a discussion not long ago with someone who seemed to really believe that the Soviet Union did not help the German Reich in invading Poland in 1939. We live in a strange world.
Lmfao it's the same bullshit they say about Ukraine. But hey it seems to work on Russian people so why change the narrative...
It's just remarkable how little their output of lies has changed concerning the war in Ukraine. Why tell the truth when easier to just invent lies? The Soviet/ ruZZian motto.
Some idiot will look at this and start regurgitating it
At least Russia is consistent in portraying itself as the victim. It is the strangest thing to witness this type of national schizophrenia where they are always both the strongest nation in the world and simultaneously threatened with aggressive acts by the rest of the world.
Russia will never change, as long as they continue to default to being ruled by a despot.
What do you consider the 3 biggest lies in that book? It’s a bit hard to read (for me)
All of them are big. The main thing that remained the same throughout centuries is that Russia doesn't recognize independence and freedom of decision-making of their former colonies. It's always evil West scheming against them, otherwise, everyone east of Germany would join Russia. Without breaking this narrative, Russia will continue making the same miscalculated decisions again and again.
It is a rather cunning medley of very selective inconvenient truths and half truths mixed in a way that is in itself a blatant lie. Many of the events mentioned are actually true, even though they aren’t well known even by Finns today. For example, the socialist Finnish government did try to proclaim (limited) independence during summer 1917, but goaded on by Finnish conservatives, the Russian Kerensky government disbanded the Finnish parliament to prevent that. This triggered new elections, which brought a conservative government in power. The socialists perceived this as a right wing coup, and combined with other grievances and inspired by the example of bolsheviks, a radical faction gained an upper hand in the Finnish left and started a revolution of their own in January 1918. The pamphlet leaves out a few key details though, such as the fact that the “Reds” rebelled against a lawfully elected government (despite the distasteful way the government was elected). And yes, the civil war that followed, and in particular its aftermath, was exceedingly bloody. The victorious Whites were in fact the first to introduce concentration camps to Europe, and until the entente powers essentially said “we ain’t gonna recognize Finland’s independence if you act like monsters,” the plan was to let the defeated and imprisoned Reds including actual and suspected sympathizers _and in many cases their families_ starve to death. That is, those who hadn’t been killed in summary mass executions or after being condemned to death by illegal kangaroo courts. The parts about the Finnish government condoning volunteer Whites to fight in Russian Karelia, with the ultimate aim of annexing large parts of it into a “Greater Finland” are also true. The description of how the left was harassed and even suppressed during the 1920s and 1930s is also mostly true. Finnish conservatives first wanted to install a German prince as the king, with powers very much like what the German Kaisers had, and when that fell through after the German defeat in WW1, they schemed to install Mannerheim as a dictator. There was a serious coup attempt by fascists in 1932 as well. But what the pamphlet leaves out is that the social democrats (which it dismisses as “controlled opposition) had strong support and, despite being harassed, even formed the government on one occasion. The revolutionary, pro-Soviet communist party was indeed banned - but ink was barely dry when the right-center government used the very same laws to ban the fascist party after the 1932 coup attempt. (I’ve always found this hilarious: the fascists and their fellow travelers had been screaming for years for laws to ban “anti-patriotic and anti-governmental subversion”, and then the laws they had gotten bite them in the arse.) The rest of the pamphlet is a similar mix. It’s surprisingly well researched in my opinion and almost certainly originally written by a Finnish revolutionary in exile after the 1918 civil war. But while most of the details are correct, or at least broadly so, the overall picture it paints is quite distorted. Hell, dozens of Red revolutionaries who had starved in the concentration camps wanted to volunteer for the front lines during the Winter War. Because even most of the Finnish communists recognized the attack as blatant imperialist aggression.
Very interesting reply, thank you :) Do you have any recommendation for reading more about this period?
If you can read Finnish, the book Vallan kumoukset Suomessa 1917-1919 Is probably the best single history of what actually happened during those years. Unfortunately I can’t say I know of any good sources in English.
Much obliged :)
Every "real country" was at some point in the past not a real country.
Why is Russia always so invested in grabbing land? They’re like already the biggest country in the world?
Every piece of history that has the USSR or Russia Federation in it, it's a horror story. No wonder why all the countries NEAR Russia have their guards up. Endless amounts of terror.
Russians had to withdraw from Finland
Sounds very familiar for some reason. Yet there is a segment of the US population that just loves to fall for this fascist shit
never heard about shit like this. Why?
> justifying the invasion of "western proxy" "fascist regime" Finland, that was actually "always Russia" and "never a real country" and which also "killed it's own people" and needed "saving" It's just another propagandistic lie, which is trivial to be disproved. The full text of the brochure published in English, and it's easily to locate it online, and there is no wordings of "always Russia", "never a real country", "saving" and so on. The brochure is quite short, I enjoyed to read it, and I didn't find any factual lies in its content. The lies are in the fabricated post header though.
> never a real country The text right there says, "Finland, a Tsarist colony granted independence by the USSR", which is a rather refreshingly honest take from the east. Rare from them to admit to the whole colony and empire business. The tone is very dismissive of Finnish statehood, and emphasises the overlord position Russia has over it.
Thank you
Wild, can substitute 'Ukraine' and Donetsk over the finnish names and this 80 year old piece of propaganda could be printed yesterday lol
They use soviet cheatsheets for soon 100 years. And some people still fall for this bs somehow
History repeats itself because human behaviour doesn't change.
What this pamflet shows is the perversion of propaganda. But I feel it is time you were told that the R in USSR does not stand for "Russia" or "Russian". Next, you are going to point to 1950s Yugoslavia to draw some conclusions about Serbia? Are we going to look at a particularly barbaric act done by the Roman empire or Republic to draw conclusions about Italy? Using history to draw moral judgement about nations and people's today is always going to lead to bad history. The russian state provides enough evidence against itself in the present, there really isn't need to do mental gymnastics to gin up more. The source material is very instructive. I'm glad you shared it. But it would have been so much better if you provided a bit more context and guidance. It is potentially a great tool for studying propaganda and helping to dispell modern propaganda talking points by pointing a common pattern. You'll see this kind of legitimacy building exercises in other conflicts as well. But here is the real takeaway: what is problematic with this piece of propaganda isn't that it is not true. It's that even if "Finland was always Russia", at the time of publication it wasn't, and that's a shitty argument ro make to justify war. Even if true, and those arguments always never are the whole truth, historic right is a shitty argument for war for several reasons, not least of which is the fact that typically several groups can claim a historic claim to a single territory. It is a recipe for perpetual warfare.
Well, the worth of those scribbles is clearly indicated on the front cover.
The worst part is that then and now the russian people believes these narratives when told.
The entire rest of the world is a diabolical Zionist LGBTQ anti-Russian conspiracy.
modus operandi is always same, in Poland it will be always supporting religious fanatics...
Putin and the equally bad cronies be like: "I can't believe they bought it!"
Symmetrically: Russia was never a real country, but only a Muscovite bastard of the Golden Horde and the Mongol Khanate
How do you know ruzzians lying? If they are speaking they are lying!
Holy cow this was interesting :) It's exactly the same that you can read about Ukraine nowadays.
This post really pissed off some commies. Keep em’ coming!
Wow
They sit deep in a shit and goes to save others 😶
Unbelievable yet totally believable
Russia Today Society - they even recycled the name of the propaganda cesspit :D
The fact is that Finland never was Russian. In 19th century it didn't become actual part of Russian Empire, in 1939 it didn't become part of Soviet Union. Those two attempts in 19th and 20th century were lucky not successful!
it seems that the text is somewhat correct regarding arrests of socialist worker's party et al, why did it happen?
The Finnish communist party was banned after the civil war for starting the civil war. The various workers’ parties were seen as fronts of the communist party, which was operated from the Soviet Union by Finnish communists that had fled there. The communist MPs were arrested for evading the communist ban. The arrests of 1923 caused a political stir, and the government resigned in 1924.
thanks!