Baltic politicos are right - Russian Empire doing population transfers.

[DrakonFin]

Exactly that. It was definitely not some conscious effort to "russify" Baltics, but rather result of policies completely indifferent to ethnic composition of populations. After all, we're all one big great Soviet people... aren't we?

Yes. Had the Soviet Union lasted two centuries, the resultant virtual annihilation of the Estonian culture and indeed, an Estonian nation, would have been entirely not a result of a determined effort to do just that.

 

[abas]

Exactly that. It was definitely not some conscious effort to "russify" Baltics, but rather result of policies completely indifferent to ethnic composition of populations. After all, we're all one big great Soviet people... aren't we?

That policy wasn't completely indifferent to ethnic composition, but was less brute than in 19th century.

 

[ninebucks]

Yes. Had the Soviet Union lasted two centuries, the resultant virtual annihilation of the Estonian culture and indeed, an Estonian nation, would have been entirely not a result of a determined effort to do just that.

There is a difference between not doing everything possible to preserve a culture, and doing everything possible to destroy a culture. Nationalities fade out of existance all the time, and very rarely because they were actively exterminated.

The Baltic nations, in my opinion, fall somewhere between these two extremes. The Soviet Union wasn't interested in whiping out entire ethnicities for no reason, and, at the same time, they weren't interested in doing everything possible to promote Estonian/Latvian/Lithuanian culture in those SSRs, (for obvious reasons).

 

[Looseheadprop]

One of favourite recurring topics for politicos from Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia is "Soviet Union tried to assimilate us through massive Slavic colonization post-1945". It is complete bull feces, but let's assume this is truth, Russian Empire/Soviet Union did engage in massive "Slavicization" program (I'm not saying "Russification", as Russians, Ukrainians and Belorussians generally stick together when living among "others" and consider themselves "Russians"). And, since 1945 is too late, let's start in 1863.

I see 1830 Polish uprising as a POD. Empire authority grow deep distrust toward ethnic and/or religious minorities and talk starts about "melting pot", where Russian Orthodox population (unified within "Orthodoxy, Autocracy, and National" dogma) should assimilate everybody else. It remains talk until 1863 due to more reasons that I could care to list. But, enraged by Lithuanian support for 1863 uprising, Empire authorities decided to test the idea. Government takes lands of all the nobles who supported uprising and distributes it among Russian settlers. Anyone who was active in uprising is re-settled in Volga region. Little by little government starts to implement the same policy in other Baltic provinces, as well as in Northern Caucusus. By the 1900, it is a firm tradition - any land reclaimed through government irrigation/land improvement programs in non-Slavic regions is distributed to Slavic settlers, non-Slavs are encouraged to re-settle in Russia proper. Poland and Finland are not affected by this policy. Poland is too fragile and there're too many Poles to digest them easily, and Finland has special status within the Empire. By 1917, there're solid (60% or more) Slavic majorities in Baltic provinces and Slavs are about 20% of population in Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, about 10-15% in Uzbekistan.

What's next?

but its true anyway, post 1945 there was russian migration en-masse to the baltic and mass deportation of baltics from there. In lativa and estonia the russian are roughly half of the population

 

[CanadianGoose]

This is OTL, only they weren't resetled in one region.

IOTL Russians expelled several dozens most active participants (usually leaving their families and possessions intact). I'm talking about massive expulsion, freeing good part of land owned by nobility for government resettlement program.

Russians just moved there as they tended to be rather good, rather urban areas.

IOTL Russians were discouraged from settling here. Russian Empire had complicated unofficial "agreement of understanding" with Balic German barons, who traded their loyalty toward Crown for the right to run Baltic provinces as their personal fiefdom. Agricultural land was largely under German control, and Estonians and Latvians were serfs (later crop-sharers). Russian settlement activity could destroy this "natural order", so local (German) authorities did not make Russians (other than military garrisons) feel welcome. It started to somewhat change in Riga in late 19th century, as booming port industries required more workers than local population could provide.

Are the stories about, say, Estonians deported to Siberia bullshit? Weren't they replaced by "Good Russians"? And wasn't the ruling CPSU rather Russian-dominated?

Deportations were never the "ethnic cleansings" scale. They were to weed "undesirable social groups" out (i.e. single digits in population percentage) and 99% of those surviving (survival rate was around 90%) were allowed to return later. And CPSU wasn't more "Russian-dominated" than share of Russians among USSR population.

For the scenario, I'd imagine the areas would stay in the RSFSR after the Civil War. This might affect the run-up to WWII somewhat, with a different Nazi-Soviet Pact, but it wouldn't be too much of a difference.

I was thinking of more subtle differences. Having hostile regime next door to Leningrad undoubtedly affected Stalin's paranoia. So it might be somewhat lesser ITTL. On the flip side, secured Baltics could result more aggressive policy against Finland.

How much does this policy undermine the authority of the Baltic German landlords?

It does not, really, but barons will see it as if it does. They're too used to ruling their own fiefs without much of intervention from Imperial authorities. Numerous Russian population will raise fears of authorities meddling.

Had the Soviet Union lasted two centuries, the resultant virtual annihilation of the Estonian culture and indeed, an Estonian nation, would have been entirely not a result of a determined effort to do just that.

Yes, it does not take 200 years of determined effort to dissolve ethnic group barely numbering 0.5% of the bigger ethnos (if even that, 700,000 Estonians vs. 150 mln. Russians/Ukrainians/Belorussians).

 

[DrakonFin]

Yes, it does not take 200 years of determined effort to dissolve ethnic group barely numbering 0.5% of the bigger ethnos (if even that, 700,000 Estonians vs. 150 mln. Russians/Ukrainians/Belorussians).

Exactly. For the small peoples and nations around and inside USSR/Russia that Slavic juggernaut has been and will be seen as a politico-cultural black hole. It is not such a wonder the Baltics are so gung ho about proclaiming their reclaimend independence and repressive nature of the Soviet policies for all those who will hear them. They'll do it while they still can.

But don't worry, maybe next time they'll get accidentally annihilated and will not be such a nuisance anymore.

 

[abas]

IOTL Russians expelled several dozens most active participants (usually leaving their families and possessions intact). I'm talking about massive expulsion, freeing good part of land owned by nobility for government resettlement program.

Several dozens? There were resettled about 4000 families, sent to Syberia 1427, to other Russian parts 1529 etc. Btw those numbers are from official reports of guvernor general Muravyov.

 

[CanadianGoose]

Exactly. For the small peoples and nations around and inside USSR/Russia that Slavic juggernaut has been and will be seen as a politico-cultural black hole. It is not such a wonder the Baltics are so gung ho about proclaiming their reclaimend independence and repressive nature of the Soviet policies for all those who will hear them. They'll do it while they still can.

Yeah, problem of a mouse living next door to dino. Even if dino is peace-loving vegetarian, his fart can accidentally gas poor mouse to death. But, isn't it nature of things? I don't remember any ethnic group losing it's sleep about preserving culture of smaller weaker neighbours. To think about it, Finns happily assimilated Russians who ended up in Finland after 1917.

 

[Grimm Reaper]

There's a difference between, as an example, Germany not being interested in preserving the culture of Holland and Denmark as opposed to Germany invading Holland or Denmark with the intent of assimilating those nations.

 

[CanadianGoose]

There's a difference between, as an example, Germany not being interested in preserving the culture of Holland and Denmark as opposed to Germany invading Holland or Denmark with the intent of assimilating those nations.

Comparisons are very dangerous and double-edged tool. You might talk about Germany not invading Denmark (which, BTW, used to have numerous limitation on foreign ownership, so they definitely didn't feel safe next door to Germany) or you might talk about Sorbs suing Merkel for genocide or Basks suing Juan Carlos in Hague. Isn't it funny?

 

[Valdemar II]

There's a difference between, as an example, Germany not being interested in preserving the culture of Holland and Denmark as opposed to Germany invading Holland or Denmark with the intent of assimilating those nations.

Interesting enough Wilhelmine Germany tried it best not to assimate its Danish minority, because Germany wanted a better relationship with Denmark more than a few more Germans and the only change in the linguistic border in Schleswig in that periode was that Flensburg became majority German*

*even today Flensburg is 25% Danish (or at least votes for SSW) and most of the towns inhabitants understand Danish.