Extent of Russification in a surviving or alternate Russian Empire

So, in OTL the Russian Empire was huge. Poland, Ukraine, Belarus, Finland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, to say nothing of various minority groups, religious groups, and tribes living within those groups.

In the OTL, it all eventually fell apart and Russia was reduced to its current borders. Putting aside simply maintaining an Empire through brutality, to what extent can the Russian Empire be Russified by the present?

Can Russia get Ukraine and Belarus to have minimal independent identity and consider themselves Russian by the present, as France did with its minors groups? Can Russia achieve and maintain a majority in Central Asia beyond Northern Kazakhstan? Assimilate and flood with settlers the Baltic and Caucasus nations well enough to get Russian majorities? Can they Russify their Jewish or Muslim populations at all?

What policies would Tsarist Russia likely pursue, and how effective would they be? Provided Russification is seen as ideal, what policies should be followed?
 
I doubt that Russia manage russificate all minorities. Russians weren't such majority which could effectively enforce that. And there probably would be so much of ethnic tensions between Russians and minorities that Russia has either step back or to be ready to civil war which it might lost.
 
A surviving Russian Empire means that the tens of millions that died during Lenin and Stalin's pruges will survive TTL.
With missing births added in, this may give Russia up to 150M extra ethnic Russians to play with, to say nothing of Ukrainians and Belarussians. For all purposes, this guarantees a Russian majority in the territory of the Empire.
Flooding the Turkestan with settlers will be easy and was ongoing prior to the revolution via peasant migration. The Caucasus
Ukrainian and Belarussian nationalism may evolve very differently, given no Bolshevik Korenizatsiya especially if Galicia never becomes part of the Empire's territory.
One possible outcome is a 'Triune' Russian Identity that's kind of similar to Britishness.
 
The Russian ethnic population is going to be much larger. The extent of that depends on two things those. The stability of Russia and the world wars. If world wars are avoid and Russia weathers a few decades without a major revolution(few 1905 at worse) then it ethnic Russian population will turn areas of the empire majority Russian by numbers instead of assimilation. Central Asia and most things east of the Urals can become majority Russian. Caucasus is probably at least a Russian plurality. Belarus is nearly Russian now. A surviving Russian Empire means Belarus is very Russian if not considered a straight up core of the empire. They could be a plurality at the most in the Baltic countries. Western Ukraine and Moldova could become majority Russian as well. Poland could have a larger minority but only a bit bigger then the otl German one that was there before ww1. Russians could maybe reach above 5 percent in Poland. Finland I see staying mostly Finnish. It might be like Poland at most maybe even a bit more Russian in percentage due to the smaller population. Russia would have population to make Finland Russian but I think Russian settlers would prefer different places given the size of Russia and their options.

European part of the empire minus caucuses are going to change less and depend more on assimilation. There are also more Catholics, non-Russian Slavs, and Jews without ww1 and the stuff after it. Europe in general will be facing overpopulation issues. Russia does have a point when they talk about Ukrainians and people in Belarus being like Russians in many way. Nationality often has more to do with public perceptions then anything else. A smart Tsar or his top men(if he or she is a puppet to someone) could integrate those two groups. Their sense of nationality could be greatly neutered or killed without world wars. People in Belarus and maybe even the Ukraine might consider themselves Russian after long enough time under the empire which would add a lot to the Russian population. Ukraine and Russia culturally are more similar then some regions of the US are to each other. Less bad blood or maybe some good relationship depending on the pod gets rid of that political divide.

Polish, Baltic, and lesser extent Finnish nationalism could still be a problem. Polish nationalism will be the biggest issue. More Russians in actual Poland only makes that worse. Poland will still want its freedom at some point and that Pan Slavic stuff doesn’t work on them. Let’s say even if they lose a big war or face serious revolution until the late 30s or 40s the only regions they could lose is Poland, Baltic, and Finland. Trying to create any more states might not work in the long run by then. You can’t really Balkanize Russian Empire too much if the ethnic Russian population grows too much. Even separating the Baltic from them might be a issue if enough Russians make demographics too unclear. A independent Baltic breaking off from the Russian Empire could be mix between Russians, Germans, Baltic people, and Jews. The extra Russians might not out number the locals but Russians, Germans, and Jews together could in this pod given long enough time.

Out east Russia colonized the region like a mix between a traditional empire and the US out west(becomes more like the US as time goes on because once they start out numbering the locals by a big enough number their treatment for the non-Russians will likely go down). Russian Empire will be able to throw its population numbers around kind of like China but are actually willing to do it. USSR and China in otl greatly hindered and restricted population movement. The Russian Empire will be encouraging mass emigration. They will add to this by sending some out there by force(a surviving Russian Empire can become just as brutal as USSR depending on the pod. Them not being communist just means their less hated by the west and open to trade with the rest of the world. It doesn’t change the fact that Russia might become more brutal as technology improves). They are probably deporting growing number of partisans, terrorist, and political opponents out east. Also Slavs out east probably have a higher likelihood of assimilating to Russian culture. I see the empire relationship with Islam being mixed. Some in Central Asia will oppose the ever increasing influx of ethnic Russians and Slavs but others could be very integrated into the empire. Russian Empire tolerance of Islam might depend on the sect, situation, and school your talking about. Russia might target certain schools and sects if they think they are a threat in anyway but leave the ones who stay to themselves or support the empire alone. The Russian Empire could setup its own unofficial state sponsored school of Islamic thought but the success could vary.

Lastly, a continued mass emigration of Jews from empire is likely. I doubt the Russian Empire treats its Jews well. They probably migrate when possible and face higher chances of being deported east by bigoted officials in the empire. The Russian Empire is probably encouraging them to leave. The emigration levels of the empire are going to be massive. Europe and US could very well put in place immigration laws to slow down or prevent the massive influx of people from the Russian Empire to their countries.
 
Last edited:
A surviving Russian Empire means that the tens of millions that died during Lenin and Stalin's pruges will survive TTL.
With missing births added in, this may give Russia up to 150M extra ethnic Russians to play with, to say nothing of Ukrainians and Belarussians. For all purposes, this guarantees a Russian majority in the territory of the Empire.
Flooding the Turkestan with settlers will be easy and was ongoing prior to the revolution via peasant migration. The Caucasus
Ukrainian and Belarussian nationalism may evolve very differently, given no Bolshevik Korenizatsiya especially if Galicia never becomes part of the Empire's territory.
One possible outcome is a 'Triune' Russian Identity that's kind of similar to Britishness.

Stalin's purges often did hurt the minorities comparatively worse than they did hurt ethnic Russians. A surviving Russian Empire would most likely not have as brutal policies as the Stalinist USSR did, anyway. A surviving Russian Empire could well have, at least until, say, the 1940s or 50s comparatively more non-Russians than there was in the OTL USSR, exactly because of the lack of Stalinist purges and other atrocities. The effects of Russification and assimilation to the domestic ethnicity might start to truly reduce the comparative numbers of non-Russians only after the middle part of the 20th century.
 
I have a question about the Russian population without ww1? Let’s say Russia goes 20 so years without a major war or 1917 level revolution, take or give. At worse they have another 1905 level revolution a few times and suffer a defeat in a proxy war or something like their defeat to Japan over this time period. Russian Empire is far from stable but growing at a consistent and rapid rate. The conservative culture of this regime and industrialization(mostly foreign or state sponsored) sees a massive and rapid population boom in Russian Empire. Russia will still be behind the west in many ways especially in regards to culture but modern technology mixed with a reactionary or conservative regime often have very high birthrates and population growth. Some ethnic Russian women could still be having 10 kid or even more while women in France and Germany are starting to have less then 5 or only 2 to 3 kids(them not experiencing ww1 off sets their drop in birthrates a decent bit but the gap between Russia and west will still be big). It could be like India or Africa after ww2 but earlier and possibly even bigger. I don’t think it’s even unfair or unreasonable to say if Russia goes on along enough without something wrecking its population or changing culture greatly(mostly regarding women) then it could reach India or China levels on population. Maybe even rival current otl India by the current day depending on the pod.

But to the main question, how would Europe react to this and how will these populations be handled especially regarding the movement of people? Will Slavic immigrants go to central or Western Europe like they did in 90s and afterwards but on a more massive scale? How would Europe and US react to all the different people emigrating out of Russia? Russian diaspora is going to be much larger. Many Europeans don’t like immigrants currently in otl and mass immigration have only made them become more hostile to some groups. I imagine Europeans in the 20s, 30s, or even 40s would treat immigrants fleeing west from the Russian Empire much worse inhumanly then otl refugees or ICE. Couldn’t you have refugee crisis level emigration of Jews from the Russian Empire if things got bad enough for them? How would Germany and Austria react to a bunch of Jews especially the more orthodox ones building up on their border trying to leave Russia or move into their country? Secular Jews probably have easiest time leaving due to them often being skilled labor and most westernized. Orthodox or more traditional Jews are probably denied at much higher rates(they are often hated most. Secular Jews actually might be against Orthodox Jews moving in. Until the Nazis, Secular Jews assimilated very quickly and without much issue in the west). Europe and US could also have a bunch of poor and unskilled Slavs come west coming for work. I doubt this will be seen as good by many Europeans. Germany is trying to Germanize Polish lands. They probably get annoyed when a bunch of Poles keep trying to move in from Russia. Germany might not be nice to Poles but many might prefer living in Germany over Russia. Germany could very well start deporting Poles in Germany to Russia if they think too many are coming over. Russia will look like a overwhelming horde to many Europeans. Wouldn’t emigration and immigration become a much bigger issue earlier then otl?
 
I have a question about the Russian population without ww1? Let’s say Russia goes 20 so years without a major war or 1917 level revolution, take or give. At worse they have another 1905 level revolution a few times and suffer a defeat in a proxy war or something like their defeat to Japan over this time period. Russian Empire is far from stable but growing at a consistent and rapid rate. The conservative culture of this regime and industrialization(mostly foreign or state sponsored) sees a massive and rapid population boom in Russian Empire. Russia will still be behind the west in many ways especially in regards to culture but modern technology mixed with a reactionary or conservative regime often have very high birthrates and population growth. Some ethnic Russian women could still be having 10 kid or even more while women in France and Germany are starting to have less then 5 or only 2 to 3 kids(them not experiencing ww1 off sets their drop in birthrates a decent bit but the gap between Russia and west will still be big). It could be like India or Africa after ww2 but earlier and possibly even bigger. I don’t think it’s even unfair or unreasonable to say if Russia goes on along enough without something wrecking its population or changing culture greatly(mostly regarding women) then it could reach India or China levels on population. Maybe even rival current otl India by the current day depending on the pod.

But to the main question, how would Europe react to this and how will these populations be handled especially regarding the movement of people? Will Slavic immigrants go to central or Western Europe like they did in 90s and afterwards but on a more massive scale? How would Europe and US react to all the different people emigrating out of Russia? Russian diaspora is going to be much larger. Many Europeans don’t like immigrants currently in otl and mass immigration have only made them become more hostile to some groups. I imagine Europeans in the 20s, 30s, or even 40s would treat immigrants fleeing west from the Russian Empire much worse inhumanly then otl refugees or ICE. Couldn’t you have refugee crisis level emigration of Jews from the Russian Empire if things got bad enough for them? How would Germany and Austria react to a bunch of Jews especially the more orthodox ones building up on their border trying to leave Russia or move into their country? Secular Jews probably have easiest time leaving due to them often being skilled labor and most westernized. Orthodox or more traditional Jews are probably denied at much higher rates(they are often hated most. Secular Jews actually might be against Orthodox Jews moving in. Until the Nazis, Secular Jews assimilated very quickly and without much issue in the west). Europe and US could also have a bunch of poor and unskilled Slavs come west coming for work. I doubt this will be seen as good by many Europeans. Germany is trying to Germanize Polish lands. They probably get annoyed when a bunch of Poles keep trying to move in from Russia. Germany might not be nice to Poles but many might prefer living in Germany over Russia. Germany could very well start deporting Poles in Germany to Russia if they think too many are coming over. Russia will look like a overwhelming horde to many Europeans. Wouldn’t emigration and immigration become a much bigger issue earlier then otl?
Two things you should consider. First: the demographic transitions, the first takes you from a situation in which people have many children, but almost all of them die allowing the population to remain stable, to one in which the infant and child mortality rate plummets while the birth rate remains high. The second takes you from that high-birth low-death stage to the one most western nations are in now, where people have just one or two children (due to the high resource cost of children in education, clothing, food etc., especially in cities) expecting all of them to survive, resulting in deaths outweighing births and population decline if not balanced by immigration. Finally, the birthrate rises again to balance the death rate as government adapts to make it easier to have children (see Sweden).
The second thing you should consider is the sheer size of the Russian Empire, with plenty of land that the state would desperately like somebody to settle and farm, and the rapid industrialisation and urbanisation Russia was undergoing prior to the first world war, which would have pushed it through the demographic stages and resulted in a lowering of the birthrate. Most estimates I've seen on this forum put a no-war Russia's population at 400-500m at the most. Big, but not China or India big. I certainly wouldn't expect hordes of Slavic immigrants flooding across Europe.
 
Two things you should consider. First: the demographic transitions, the first takes you from a situation in which people have many children, but almost all of them die allowing the population to remain stable, to one in which the infant and child mortality rate plummets while the birth rate remains high. The second takes you from that high-birth low-death stage to the one most western nations are in now, where people have just one or two children (due to the high resource cost of children in education, clothing, food etc., especially in cities) expecting all of them to survive, resulting in deaths outweighing births and population decline if not balanced by immigration. Finally, the birthrate rises again to balance the death rate as government adapts to make it easier to have children (see Sweden).
The second thing you should consider is the sheer size of the Russian Empire, with plenty of land that the state would desperately like somebody to settle and farm, and the rapid industrialisation and urbanisation Russia was undergoing prior to the first world war, which would have pushed it through the demographic stages and resulted in a lowering of the birthrate. Most estimates I've seen on this forum put a no-war Russia's population at 400-500m at the most. Big, but not China or India big. I certainly wouldn't expect hordes of Slavic immigrants flooding across Europe.
I understand the points about demographic transition but I think that point often ignore cultural, demographic, and situational circumstances. Russia was a very agrarian society and nation before ww1. They won’t be going into the third or second demographic transition because they never had that like Britain or the US. They will be jumping right into the third wave of the industrial revolution without really experiencing the other 2. Take the birthrates of the first transition then mix that with the low infant morality rates and technology of the third transition. Russia population growth would be ridiculous. Russia already had a much higher birthrate then most of Europe before ww1. That’s only going to get bigger without demographic hits and when industrialization takes off.
 
A surviving Russian Empire means that the tens of millions that died during Lenin and Stalin's pruges will survive TTL.
With missing births added in, this may give Russia up to 150M extra ethnic Russians to play with, to say nothing of Ukrainians and Belarussians. For all purposes, this guarantees a Russian majority in the territory of the Empire.
Flooding the Turkestan with settlers will be easy and was ongoing prior to the revolution via peasant migration. The Caucasus
Ukrainian and Belarussian nationalism may evolve very differently, given no Bolshevik Korenizatsiya especially if Galicia never becomes part of the Empire's territory.
One possible outcome is a 'Triune' Russian Identity that's kind of similar to Britishness.
Doubtful, since there would be a lot more ethnic Kazakhstan without the famines.
 
Perhaps we could have Austria and Russia be the instigators of WWI and win recreating Poland from the ethnic polish territories from Prussia, Austria and Russia.
 
Doubtful, since there would be a lot more ethnic Kazakhstan without the famines.
OTL Kazakhs got demographically overwhelmed by Russians in the 40s, it's a bit of a miracle Kazakhstan even went independent, ITTL the stream of settlers would never stop and the Kazakhs would jump over the first few steps of the demographic model and might instead go straight to "stable" as they'll be pulled along with the Russian/Ukrainian majority.
The Soviets accellerated their demographic transition by promoting women into work, legalizing abortion and contraception and crushing the churchs influence, Imperial Russia is not going to do any of that until, maybe, very late in the 20th century.

As for the stream of emigrants, i'm not sure they'll be universally seen as a bad thing, for example for A-H they might be very useful - what's the chance of a Georgian immigrant who got settled into Transylvania to become a Romanian nationalist? Next to 0? Baltic peole, Finns, Belorussians etc all can be useful to break up old majorities in restive or contested provinces, hough A-H would avoid Poles and Ukrainians like the Bubonic plague.
 
I understand the points about demographic transition but I think that point often ignore cultural, demographic, and situational circumstances. Russia was a very agrarian society and nation before ww1. They won’t be going into the third or second demographic transition because they never had that like Britain or the US. They will be jumping right into the third wave of the industrial revolution without really experiencing the other 2. Take the birthrates of the first transition then mix that with the low infant morality rates and technology of the third transition. Russia population growth would be ridiculous. Russia already had a much higher birthrate then most of Europe before ww1. That’s only going to get bigger without demographic hits and when industrialization takes off.
India, Brazil and other Latin American countries skipped the first 2 waves of the Industrial Revolution. They're still either in the 3rd Demographic stage or moving into it. Russia in 1914 was very agrarian, but so was the US, Canada and many other countries. They urbanised. Russia was also urbanising, as can be seen by the rapid expansion of St. Petersburg, Moscow and Kiev in the late Tsarist period. Mechanisation of agriculture, which will make its way to Russia, will further drive urbanisation as agricultural jobs vanish, while industrialisation will act as a pull factor towards the cities. Russia isn't somehow different or seperate from the rest of the world because of some intrinsic property of Russian culture. Geopolitics and ideology are what have pushed it along a rather unique payh otl. Without the world wars and the revolution, I don't really see why it would be all that different to other countries.
 
OTL Kazakhs got demographically overwhelmed by Russians in the 40s, it's a bit of a miracle Kazakhstan even went independent, ITTL the stream of settlers would never stop and the Kazakhs would jump over the first few steps of the demographic model and might instead go straight to "stable" as they'll be pulled along with the Russian/Ukrainian majority.
The Soviets accellerated their demographic transition by promoting women into work, legalizing abortion and contraception and crushing the churchs influence, Imperial Russia is not going to do any of that until, maybe, very late in the 20th century.

As for the stream of emigrants, i'm not sure they'll be universally seen as a bad thing, for example for A-H they might be very useful - what's the chance of a Georgian immigrant who got settled into Transylvania to become a Romanian nationalist? Next to 0? Baltic peole, Finns, Belorussians etc all can be useful to break up old majorities in restive or contested provinces, hough A-H would avoid Poles and Ukrainians like the Bubonic plague.
The Kazakhs lost up to a third of their population, so there's be a lot more Kazakhs ( nd there's an upper limit of Russians going to Central Asia, unless some ASB we industrialized Russia)
 
India, Brazil and other Latin American countries skipped the first 2 waves of the Industrial Revolution. They're still either in the 3rd Demographic stage or moving into it. Russia in 1914 was very agrarian, but so was the US, Canada and many other countries. They urbanised. Russia was also urbanising, as can be seen by the rapid expansion of St. Petersburg, Moscow and Kiev in the late Tsarist period. Mechanisation of agriculture, which will make its way to Russia, will further drive urbanisation as agricultural jobs vanish, while industrialisation will act as a pull factor towards the cities. Russia isn't somehow different or seperate from the rest of the world because of some intrinsic property of Russian culture. Geopolitics and ideology are what have pushed it along a rather unique payh otl. Without the world wars and the revolution, I don't really see why it would be all that different to other countries.
Russia likely to experience more industrialization then they did. The birthrates have not really slowed in India and when it does it is still much higher then the west. The only reason China population isn’t bigger is because of communism and the male to female imbalance currently. Chinese communism still technically encourages women’s rights. They just only care about the cities those so you only see them encourage good treatment of women there while out in countryside you will see fathers kill newborn girl because the government not as focused on the rural masses due to the size of the nation. Chinese population could be a lot bigger too given the right pod. Also the Indian government trying to westernize itself culturally to an extent. That includes their view of women which is a big factor in birthrates and populations. Russia under Tsar regime definitely tries to be more like the west then the USSR but they are going to cherry pick when it comes to westernizing. They are likely only adopting aspects of Western Europe or western world they like. For example technology, arts, fashions, modern economic structures, and goods will be desired but democracy and human rights less so. They are a major power maybe even a superpower down the road. It’s harder to change the culture of a nation when they think they are in a position of power or actually are. That pan-Slavic mindset could make the Russian Empire more nationalistic and reactionary in many ways. You could have nationalist groups and government encouraging women to have as many kids as possible. You would have a strong Orthodox Church probably doing the same too. Christians and Muslims in the Russia Empire are going to stay much more religious and larger in numbers too without communism so that only adds to it more. I think the Abrahamic religions in their more conservative forms encourage or pressure women to have more kids then other faiths. Lastly India and China didn’t slow down growing in numbers until overpopulation became a big issue. Russia has a lot more land to grow then both of them. Russia probably doesn’t slow down until it realizes its facing a serious overpopulation problem at least in some places. Has Pakistan and Saudi experienced drops in birthrates yet or to a great degree? It seems the slow down in birthrates in places like that is more due to space then change in culture.
 
Russia likely to experience more industrialization then they did. The birthrates have not really slowed in India and when it does it is still much higher then the west. The only reason China population isn’t bigger is because of communism and the male to female imbalance currently. Chinese communism still technically encourages women’s rights. They just only care about the cities those so you only see them encourage good treatment of women there while out in countryside you will see fathers kill newborn girl because the government not as focused on the rural masses due to the size of the nation. Chinese population could be a lot bigger too given the right pod. Also the Indian government trying to westernize itself culturally to an extent. That includes their view of women which is a big factor in birthrates and populations. Russia under Tsar regime definitely tries to be more like the west then the USSR but they are going to cherry pick when it comes to westernizing. They are likely only adopting aspects of Western Europe or western world they like. For example technology, arts, fashions, modern economic structures, and goods will be desired but democracy and human rights less so. They are a major power maybe even a superpower down the road. It’s harder to change the culture of a nation when they think they are in a position of power or actually are. That pan-Slavic mindset could make the Russian Empire more nationalistic and reactionary in many ways. You could have nationalist groups and government encouraging women to have as many kids as possible. You would have a strong Orthodox Church probably doing the same too. Christians and Muslims in the Russia Empire are going to stay much more religious and larger in numbers too without communism so that only adds to it more. I think the Abrahamic religions in their more conservative forms encourage or pressure women to have more kids then other faiths. Lastly India and China didn’t slow down growing in numbers until overpopulation became a big issue. Russia has a lot more land to grow then both of them. Russia probably doesn’t slow down until it realizes its facing a serious overpopulation problem at least in some places. Has Pakistan and Saudi experienced drops in birthrates yet or to a great degree? It seems the slow down in birthrates in places like that is more due to space then change in culture.
According to a quick wiki search, the total fertility rate (average number of children per woman over her lifetime) was 2.18 in 2015/6, down from 2.68 in 2005/6. Breaking it down into urban and rural, the picture becomes even starker. Urban TFR was 1.75 in 2015/6, down from 2.06 a decade earlier, while rural TFR was 2.41, down from 2.98. Replacement is generally reckoned to be 2.1, accounting for the fact that some people die young, are infertile, or simply do not have children. So, yeah. Birthrates in India have slowed down significantly, and urbanisation seems to correlate. another correlation is the rise in the literacy rate, from 64.83% in 2001 to 79.31% in 2011. Russia in the early 20th Century was seeing similar patterns of urbanisation and expansion of literacy.
A counterpoint to the idea of space: Australia, Canada, Brazil, Argentina, any sparsely populated country with a low birthrate.
Deeply Catholic Italy, with a TFR of 1.35, gives an excellent refutation to the idea that religion will make people have more kids. People will have more kids if a) they want them, and b) they can actually afford to. Once the infant mortality rate drops, eliminating the need to have many children in order to make sure at least some will survive to adulthood, the costs of childrearing rise, for instance with the introduction of compulsory schooling and the banning of child labour, education allows people to know that there are ways to avoid pregnancy other than just not having sex, and women begin to move into the industrial workforce where pregnancy usually gets them fired, birthrates tend to drop.
 
According to a quick wiki search, the total fertility rate (average number of children per woman over her lifetime) was 2.18 in 2015/6, down from 2.68 in 2005/6. Breaking it down into urban and rural, the picture becomes even starker. Urban TFR was 1.75 in 2015/6, down from 2.06 a decade earlier, while rural TFR was 2.41, down from 2.98. Replacement is generally reckoned to be 2.1, accounting for the fact that some people die young, are infertile, or simply do not have children. So, yeah. Birthrates in India have slowed down significantly, and urbanisation seems to correlate. another correlation is the rise in the literacy rate, from 64.83% in 2001 to 79.31% in 2011. Russia in the early 20th Century was seeing similar patterns of urbanisation and expansion of literacy.
A counterpoint to the idea of space: Australia, Canada, Brazil, Argentina, any sparsely populated country with a low birthrate.
Deeply Catholic Italy, with a TFR of 1.35, gives an excellent refutation to the idea that religion will make people have more kids. People will have more kids if a) they want them, and b) they can actually afford to. Once the infant mortality rate drops, eliminating the need to have many children in order to make sure at least some will survive to adulthood, the costs of childrearing rise, for instance with the introduction of compulsory schooling and the banning of child labour, education allows people to know that there are ways to avoid pregnancy other than just not having sex, and women begin to move into the industrial workforce where pregnancy usually gets them fired, birthrates tend to drop.
Those sparsely populated countries like Australia and Canada is more due to lack of immigration which was caused by immigration restrictions or lack of desire/access of people wanting to go there. Brazil and Argentina could have attracted much larger immigration rates with better economies and governments. New World nations depend on immigration for growth due to so many of the original natives dying off or being in low number. Russian Empire continues growth might lead to many more diaspora groups from the Russian Empire in the new world.

Canada and Australia are also much more secular and democratic then Russian Empire. Even Argentina and arguably Brazil are to a much lesser extent. Italy drop in birth rates are more due to the world wars and their aftermath. Italian birth rates would have also stayed higher for longer without that. Probably longer then most of northern and Western Europe. Without the world wars women are much more restricted from economics and politics due to their war effort being important. Your more democratic and secular nations will still have their women’s rights movements but the rest of the world could be hindered by a few decades. Russian Empire going to have no access to birth control, encouraging women to more “traditional roles”, and have state/church propaganda supporting it because they want more Russians. They might even subsidize large families if they can which encourages high birthrates. Catholic nations like Italy stop having as many kids because things after 1914 made that economically hard. The world economy could be in a boom for decade or more until the next big crash(it is bound to happen eventually. It’s more of a issue of modernizing the economic system and them growing too fast and causing a bubble). But the 20s could see a baby boom if 20s experience a more internationally economic boom. I think the social impact of the world wars greatly altered many people mindsets. Without it we might not see the same trends exactly.
 
Those sparsely populated countries like Australia and Canada is more due to lack of immigration which was caused by immigration restrictions or lack of desire/access of people wanting to go there. Brazil and Argentina could have attracted much larger immigration rates with better economies and governments. New World nations depend on immigration for growth due to so many of the original natives dying off or being in low number. Russian Empire continues growth might lead to many more diaspora groups from the Russian Empire in the new world.

Canada and Australia are also much more secular and democratic then Russian Empire. Even Argentina and arguably Brazil are to a much lesser extent. Italy drop in birth rates are more due to the world wars and their aftermath. Italian birth rates would have also stayed higher for longer without that. Probably longer then most of northern and Western Europe. Without the world wars women are much more restricted from economics and politics due to their war effort being important. Your more democratic and secular nations will still have their women’s rights movements but the rest of the world could be hindered by a few decades. Russian Empire going to have no access to birth control, encouraging women to more “traditional roles”, and have state/church propaganda supporting it because they want more Russians. They might even subsidize large families if they can which encourages high birthrates. Catholic nations like Italy stop having as many kids because things after 1914 made that economically hard. The world economy could be in a boom for decade or more until the next big crash(it is bound to happen eventually. It’s more of a issue of modernizing the economic system and them growing too fast and causing a bubble). But the 20s could see a baby boom if 20s experience a more internationally economic boom. I think the social impact of the world wars greatly altered many people mindsets. Without it we might not see the same trends exactly.
The baby boom was caused by the second world war, and the period of economic prosperity that succeeded it in which, for perhaps the only time in history, it was actually feasable for working class families to live a fairly good life on just one income. Before and after, working class women worked, which limited the appeal and practicality of having many children. Even many middle class women worked before having their first child, which incentivised them to put it off so they could build up savings to buy a house etc. Women were actually shoved out of the workforce to a far greater degree than the prewar situation primarily to ensure returning soldiers would have jobs. Absent the wars, there's no need for that.
For most of the 20th Century Argentina and Brazil have been military dictatorships that used the Catholic Church to help legitimise their rule. Argentina had infamous death squads at one point. I'm not sure you can really argue it was significantly more democratic than Tsarist Russia.
 
The baby boom was caused by the second world war, and the period of economic prosperity that succeeded it in which, for perhaps the only time in history, it was actually feasable for working class families to live a fairly good life on just one income. Before and after, working class women worked, which limited the appeal and practicality of having many children. Even many middle class women worked before having their first child, which incentivised them to put it off so they could build up savings to buy a house etc. Women were actually shoved out of the workforce to a far greater degree than the prewar situation primarily to ensure returning soldiers would have jobs. Absent the wars, there's no need for that.
For most of the 20th Century Argentina and Brazil have been military dictatorships that used the Catholic Church to help legitimise their rule. Argentina had infamous death squads at one point. I'm not sure you can really argue it was significantly more democratic than Tsarist Russia.
I’m saying place like Argentina has had periods of democracy and still have a republic system. They experienced it unlike Russia. Same for Brazil. Russian Empire has been a pretty authoritative society and monarchy for hundreds of years. The Russian monarchs line goes back way before Argentina was even discovered by Spain. I’m also saying more of a government encouraged baby boom could happen in Russia during a time of growth. American families and much of the new world kept having more kids on average then Europe at times due to available land and opportunities making big families vital. Russian urbanization under a non communist system are going to be spread out more like the US and not packed together like Europe. It’s much easier to have a family of 10 in Russia then UK. Also industrialization and urbanization might provide continued land for big rural families so even if city drops faster the rural areas keep feeding into the growth. Also would the Russian Empire not give two shits about the environment and probably be for factories once they figure out some of their major impacts? Putin now said himself a couple more degrees isn’t a bad thing for Russia. I imagine a Tsar could be worse on that and think greenhouse gases will help melt away some of colder areas of Russia especially Siberia. What would the impact of a bigger population and massive industrialization cause to the region? Also if that region became too populous and industrialist want the Chinese try to move in more when they go through trouble? Russia might not be nice but if Russia is stable and has work I could see Chinese people try to flee to Russia especially if Japan or warlords are running around in China for whatever reasons. More settlements and people near China border the more practical it becomes to go there. What would be the impact and chance of the Russian east coast area becoming a much bigger urban hub of trade and the military?
 
Top