# The Red Insurrection in Finland in 1918/Part 1/Chapter 3

3. THE MARCH REVOLUTION IN RUSSIA AND THE POSITION OF FINLAND.
When the Russian revolution broke out in March, 1917, it was, of course, welcomed with the greatest joy throughout all Finland, especially as the Government elected by the Duma immediately took up the Finnish question. The strongest feeling of deliverance and relief was, however, in the beginning due to the fact that our political prisoners in Russia might now be sure of liberation. Since the autumn of 1915 the leader of the Lantdag, Svinhufvud, had been in Siberia; thither also the mayor of Vasa city, Hasselblatt, and several others had been deported; the chief of the fire department was in the interior of Russia, and, finally, a hundred Finnish patriots had been confined for months in the prisons of St. Petersburg awaiting sentence of death. The thought of these unhappy victims to the struggle for our right had lain like a heavy load on the whole community; it was to them, therefore, that the first joyful thoughts from Finland went out.
Nor was it long before information was received that the new Russian Government had done everything in its power, viz., once more restored to Finland all her rights. Still at the same time it was found that the representatives of our Labour Party had preferred the demand that the Russian Provisional Government should introduce into its manifesto promises of the social reforms desired by the party; but as these demands were at ​once rejected as contrary precisely to those fundamental laws which would now again become valid, this bold step did not attract any particular attention. Yet, in the light of later events, this was the first sign that the Labour Party did not shrink from resorting to any foreign means of power, when it was a question of carrying through their own private claims.
The situation soon became very complicated.
The drama played in Finland by the Russian troops carried away by the intoxication of the revolution, showed what an army in process of disintegration means, and what an Asiatic barbarism the Russian army in dissolution was able to develop. The first days of the revolution in Helsingfors took the shape of a huge riot of the soldiers and the mob. Detachments of naval and land forces dashed about in the motor-cars of their commanders, all with rifle or revolver in hand, with the finger on the trigger, firing volleys of shot into the air for joy, or shooting straight before them in order to increase the din and noise caused by the furious speed. They were hunting for the officers who had concealed themselves. The latter were killed wherever they were found, in their houses, in the street, or on staircases. The fatal shot was fired almost without exception from behind, in an unguarded moment when the victim was ordered to come along to be submitted to examination, or simply arrested without ceremony. The city was entirely in the power of the Russian soldiers. They had turned out the police and maintained "order" themselves. Demonstration meetings and processions were arranged. Machine-guns were pulled through the streets, and fired off now in this place, now in that. Anything like this Russo-Barbarian frenzy had never yet been witnessed by the population; whichever way you cast your eye in the streets you saw only wild, armed ​bands with the expression of madmen on their faces, carrying revolvers in their hands and the swords of murdered officers at their sides. These, then, were the deliverers of Russia—and of Finland!
It was not possible to regard the riotous bands with any immediate sympathy, even if one was obliged to argue oneself into the belief that even their activity had helped Finland to comparative liberty. It was a Russian mob which was presented to one's sight; frenzied, brutal, ignorant masses that took the life of their superiors with impunity. And the aversion to these masses grew when it was understood that they by no means intended to abolish the Russian command in Finland. In place of the Russian gendarmery came a "Counter Espionage Department for the Defence of Popular Liberty," which took over all the papers of the gendarmery from the time of war. The liberated Finnish prisoners in St. Petersburg were obliged to fly quickly across the frontier to Sweden, the new Russian military authorites—all sorts of boards and committees—continued to arrest Finnish citizens and arrange house searches. Finland was still ruled by the Russian military garrisoned there, though now no longer by the officers but by the soldiers.
The Labour Party did not, however, entertain any doubts. Bound by its traditions to the Russian revolutionary movement, it now cast itself head foremost into the hubbub caused by this latter in Finland. The large demonstration processions of the first weeks were Finno-Russian, the Labour press at once adopted the whole of the wild Russian phraseology, and the lively fraternising started during the fortification-work between the Russian soldiers and Finnish working-men was now complete.
It is a matter of course that, in the undisciplined masses which constituted the Russian troops, the most extreme elements would take the leadership; the murdering ​of officers was an excellent introduction. It is equally natural that among the Finnish masses of labourers that were expressly invited by the faction-leaders to fraternise with the Russians, the most violent individuals were in the liveliest co-operation with the Russian leaders. These latter were for the most part marines recruited in the first instance among the crews of the big ironclads which had been lying in the ports during the whole of the war, and the hands of which had therefore had plenty of time to develop into full-fledged Maximalists, Bolsheviks—nay, into anything and everything but efficient labourers and firm characters.
In Finland pure mob-rule developed with unexpected swiftness. Besides, the Russian soldiers' own conduct, a particularly extensive general pardon granted in consequence of the revolution, by which a great number of criminals were liberated, was conducive to this. But first and foremost the tactics of the Labour Party. As before mentioned, it had gained a majority at the elections in the summer of 1916, and when now the Single-Chamber assembled, Kullervo Manner, later of such melancholy fame, became its leader, and since then the equally notorious Oskari Tokoi became president of the parliamentary Government which was elected.
One would have thought that the Labour Party ought to have been satisfied with a majority both in Parliament and Government, and should now have entered upon a sober and dignified policy. But this was by no means the case. The first declaration of Mr. Tokoi's Government was certainly applauded in all circles, for in this he stated plainly and unreservedly how much Finland had hoped for the defeat of Russia in the war, and with what confidence we now looked forward to a freer and happier future for the country. But even if the Labour Party thus observed a certain dignity in its most official conduct, ​it still continued its agitation policy against the bourgeoisie with unwearied zeal. Strikes broke out one after the Other. Their purpose was to introduce the eight-hour working-day. This demand was quickly acceded to in several industries, but new causes for strikes were continually found. The worst confusion was brought about In the agricultural world. During the busiest seed-time strike upon strike was organised among the farm hands. They too demanded an eight-hour working-day, a claim which it would be most difficult to give general sanction to within this sphere of activity. A lot of the strikes were started out of pure spitefulness. It was dissatisfaction with a foreman and the demand that he should be discharged, or there was something the matter with the food or the houses; often a strike was proclaimed against the food crisis. The farm hands refused to belabour the soil and sow, thinking by this refusal to enforce bigger rations.
The strikes often assumed a violent character. The strikers prevented the people on the farms from milking or feeding the cows. The farmers were locked up and threatened with death if they did not agree to the demands of the "people," the dairies were closed by force, and there were conflicts, with stone-throwing, stabbing and shooting with revolvers.
The leaders of the Labour Party might, of course, have done much to stop this movement which, for every week that passed, assumed more plainly the character of arbitrariness and violence. But they did not. The reasons for this were many. In part they were not able, and in part they were not willing to interfere with the violent agitation of the masses. This would have demanded co-operation with the bourgeoisie, and such co-operation was not desired. It would have demanded the established of an active native police force—a Government ​police by preference—whereas now it was the express policy of the Labour Party to destroy the police entirely. The police force, which had been ousted by the Russian soldiers at the very beginning of the revolution, never came into being again. The "people" felt no confidence in this institution, and in its stead local corps for the maintenance of order were established—a "militia," the men of which were to belong to the Labour Party. The struggle to get the police authority of the country entirely into its own hands was so energetically carried on by the Labour Party, and was so successful, that later on in the year the militia in many cases gave the signal for all sorts of disturbances by striking first. Already in the course of the summer the police force of Helsingfors struck, and this act was of course illustrated by a whole series of offences, from the picking of pockets to murder, as was very natural in a city of 200,000 inhabitants which was without any real police, and was besides the haunt of huge masses of undisciplined Russian soldiers.
In the meanwhile the many strikes and the general disturbance had another effect which was also of advantage to the Labour Party. They scared the bourgeoisie. This latter now got to know what "the power of the people" meant; it realised that the proletariat no longer begged and prayed, but claimed and demanded. Never, I suppose, has the working-man, but especially the rough, felt so puffed up with power as in the year 1917 in Finland; never, I suppose, has the bourgeois had so strong a feeling as then that he was only tolerated and that his part was only silence and acquiescence. It was felt in the streets and in tram-cars—everywhere where people of different classes came together—that Finland had got a ruler, that the working-men with the assistance of the Russian soldiers had come to feel that ​their "class" was the one that ruled the country. A typical illustration of this feeling was a resolution, carried at a meeting of labourers at Torneå, in which the upper class were commanded to give up wearing starched collars and cuffs "so that they could get to look like other people."
Difficult as were the exterior and interior conditions of the country, an increased mob-rule could only cause still greater confusion, trouble and disaster. The Lantdag was at work and treated a great number of Bills, but the Labour Party brooked no opposition, would not hear of the least modification or amendment of the Bills once proposed by it. The debates were one long series of violent oratorical sallies against the bourgeoisie, however willing, and more than willing, these latter in fact were to fix by legislation the length of the working-day within the various industries, to reform the municipal legislation, and to accelerate the emancipation of the cottagers—the three chief claims of the Labour Party. But the objective of the party was power. It had only a narrow majority in the Lantdag; it therefore behoved it to fan the hatred against the "upper class" to a still greater flame. The party did not feel how many enemies it raised up against itself in this way. The farmers were resentful on account of the agricultural strikes, and even the older and more sober working-men began to entertain doubts of the development their party was taking. For it was quite plain that an element of pure ruffianism was coming more and more into the foreground.
However disquieting the situation was in the interior, it was not given all the attention it might have deserved, for another and more important question filled the minds of all—the old question of the relations with Russia. The impotence of the great empire began to show more and more plainly. All the various foreign nationalities within the frontiers of the empire sought to emancipate ​themselves, and the possibility of an independent Finland came nearer and nearer. It was, of course, difficult to maintain a uniform and firm line of policy in this question, so vague was the perspective, so varying the Russian drama. But the trend of things was given; the object must be to get as far as possible from the Russian muddle.
Only the Labour Party vacillated. It was fascinated by the great revolution and drawn towards it as the moth towards the flame. "I believe I am expressing correctly the inmost thought of the whole Finnish proletariat,"wrote one of the leaders of the Party on the 4th May, "when I say that the Finnish democracy wishes to fight side by side with the Russian democracy for the most exalted ideals of humanity, and when I say that its will is that Finland may for ever constitute an internally autonomic part of the great free Russia's democracy."
But such declarations were as yet out of place. At a party congress in June the Labour Party, without such far-reaching suggestions, resolved that "Finland's people shall be emancipated from State dependency and tutelage."
For as yet the "bourgeoisie" were in power in Russia. On the 3rd July a representative of the Finnish Labour Party expressly declares that this is the meaning of the efforts for independence made by the Finnish proletariat. He says, in a memorial to the great Working-men's and Soldiers' Council at St. Petersburg: "Hitherto we have been obliged to fight on two fronts—against our own bourgeoisie, and against the Russian Government. If our class war is to be successful, if we are to be able to gather all our strength on one front, against our own bourgeoisie, we need Independence, for which Finland is already ripe."
There was yet another reason why the Labour Party entered the independence of Finland as an item in its programme. The hatred against Russia was so vivid in all sections of the population that overt friendship with ​Russia might have become fatal. A radical striving for independence would, however, have every condition for strengthening the power of the party. This calculation certainly proved right. In the course of the summer the Labour Party got help in the Chamber from a few bourgeoisie representatives when, on the strength of a resolution sanctioned by the Russian Working-men's and Soldiers' Congress, it wanted to push through Finland's independence in a hurry, together with a number of radical reforms coupled with it. This took place at a moment when it was believed that the downfall of the Russian Provisional Government was pending. But the Government survived the Bolshevik assault and dissolved the Lantdag. Writs were issued for new elections for the 1st October. After the dissolution came a series of parliamentary conflicts, which it would take too long to detail here. It need only be stated that the solution of the problem of Finland's independence as sanctioned by the Labour Party, presupposed a continued connection with Russia, whose Government alone had the right of deciding all external and military matters.
The strikes and disturbances continued throughout the summer, and as the butt of them were chosen by preference the representatives of the townships and the country communities. Of these latter was demanded a rise in salaries, or extra work, in order to mitigate distress, etc., and to carry through these claims, the premises where the representatives were assembled were besieged, and the representatives prevented from leaving them, until the claim was granted. At Åbo the representatives were beleaguered for a day and a half; in Helsingfors the whole affair lasted only a few hours; at Helsinge it looked as if there was going to be black trouble. The mob called in the aid of the Russian military when a siege of a day and a night had brought no result, and the ​soldiers threatened instantly to set fire to the meeting-house, which was built of wood, if the representatives did not at once comply with the "People's" wish. As the soldiers were evidently in good earnest, the majority of the representatives decided to grant the increase in pay which was the object of the whole affair.
Events of this kind encouraged provisions for the maintenance of order. The successors of the police—the militia of the Labour Party—had proved incapable of doing anything. To this trouble was added a number of cares for the future. A German invasion in Finland was not excluded. At least it might be hoped that the Russian troops would evacuate Finland after an eventual separate peace. In both cases a removal of the Russian troops might then be thought of, and what this meant was seen from the communications about the retreat in Galicia after Kerenski's unsuccessful offensive in July. The whole population of Finland knew that the troops of Russian soldiers it saw in its villages might at any moment be changed into hordes of wild animals, just like those which had looted and burnt, committed murder and outrage in Tarnopol and other cities, and it did not wish to suffer such a fate without at least making some attempt at resistance.
Taking all this into account—the already prevailing anarchy, the mob-rule with its continual acts of violence, and the fear of possible Russian massacres, it was both reasonable and necessary to form protection corps of volunteers for the defence of the life and property of the population. It was just as natural that there should be a wish to recruit these corps from all sections of society and all parties. In many parts the organisation was begun in perfect harmony between the "Socialists" and "Bourgeois." Anyone would be able to see that the matter was urgent and of importance to everybody. ​In the rules and regulations for the Protective Corps was contained the clause that they were only to turn out at the orders of the lawful police. The Government, from which the representatives of the Labour Party had withdrawn after the dissolution of the Lantdag, established its police-school in the country near the town of Borgå, where a mounted troop of 200 men was trained to be ready to be sent out in an emergency to stop revolts in any part of the country. The institution of protective corps was undisguisedly supported by a couple of the provincial papers of the Labour Press. Yet the whole movement was never very extensive. The Protective Corps hardly felt equal to their great task, especially as a great shortage of arms was felt. For many years the import of arms to Finland had been prohibited, therefore there was only a small store of army rifles and a few more revolvers in the possession of the Corps. The 200 pupils in the police-school in November owned twelve rifles, the Protective Corps at Helsingfors in January, 1918, at the outbreak of the insurrection, were in possession of 100. And in the worst case the foe would be a Russian army corps fully provided with artillery and much else, besides the whole of the Russian Baltic fleet. The prospect was not a bright one.
In the meanwhile the various Protective Corps had appeared here and there, had prevented a robbery of butter destined for the hospitals, captured eighteen scoundrels at Helsinge, etc. This was the signal for the Socialists not only to withdraw from all co-operation, but also to declare war against the Protective Corps. In the chief organ of the Labour Press, "Työmies" (the Working-man), the leading article for the 28th August bore the following title: "The Civic Guard Ready to Attack the Working-man. An Organisation embracing the Whole of the Country is Started."
​The article asserts quite coolly that the bourgeoisie have armed themselves to "mutilate the starving proletariat." "There is no intention of checking the marauding policy of the war ruffians, but in support of it citizens are armed against the desperate working-men in order to pour out the blood of brethren." This, of course, was sheer conscious untruth. What was the purpose of the Protective Corps will appear from what has been stated above. The want of an efficient police force also showed itself in the rationing of food, the producers in the country were very unwilling to send their products to the towns for the express reason that they feared they would be seized without ceremony by the mob. Here, then, was another task for the Protective Corps. But the campaign against them was continued in the Labour Press. A few more extracts will give an idea of the tone. On the 25th September "Työmies," under the title; "Bourgeois' Sanguinary Guards. They Are Being Trained and Armed Quickly. Their Activity is Directed against the Working-men," writes amongst other things as follows: "It is the intention of the upper classes to commit sanguinary deeds, and to crush the working-men's organisations by force of arms. Is there any difference between Bobrikoff's gendarme rule and this occupation? By no means. These men of the Protective Corps go almost further. They wander about with the finger on the trigger, and are ready to snap the life out of anyone who is dressed in the labourer's jacket." "The bourgeois themselves have let fall the veil. Their blood-dripping measures are revealed to the sight of the honest fellow-citizen, their armed, thousand-headed guards and mounted troops. The bourgeois are bringing up ignorant men to wholesale slaughter of their own fellow citizens. They have already emptied the arsenals of our country, and are ​directing the muzzles of their guns against their own countrymen, against the hearts of the working-men. The prosperous open their purses and pay tribute of blood in order to protect their class interests."
And all this because eighteen malefactors have been arrested at Helsinge who have held the province in terror for weeks on end, and among which there was one assassin!
The police-school meets with a similar treatment. It says about it: "In Finland we have now over 100 Jack the Rippers. The bourgeois have made a mathematically correct calculation, for the result will be exactly the same whether you reduce the number of stomachs or increase the bread rations."
Whence all this? In part the articles may be accounted for as weapons in the electioneering campaign which was the forerunner of the new Lantdag elections. But the reason why the Labour Party entered the lists in defence of the misdeeds of the mob and the more and more violent anarchy in the country lay deeper. The power of the Bolshevik Party in Russia was growing, and with this party, among whose most eager adherents were the troops garrisoned in Finland and the crews of the Baltic fleet, the Finnish Labour Party was in lively connection. This party was to bring about the great social revolution throughout the world, one fine day it would take all power into its hands, and the Finnish "comrades" wished to take a share in this. They knew quite well that all the other parties in Finland would oppose a Finno-Russian proletariat dictatorship, they knew that the Protective Corps would resist such attempts to force Finland into the Russian chaos. Therefore they talked in this high strain, therefore Finland's respectable citizens were made to appear as bloodthirsty wild beasts, therefore the food crisis was presented as the outcome of their wish to starve "the labouring ​people," and therefore all disturbing elements, all robbers and incendiaries, were welcome for the support of the approaching revolution. By painting the citizens as Russian bureaucrats and oppressors of the purest water the end was gained, the Russian military gang and the Finnish labourers presented a common front against the upper class. The situation became clearer, the somersault had come off successfully, the Finnish patriots, who with their life and liberty had defended their country against Russian oppression, who had greeted the Russian revolution with rejoicings, had now been made into "black counter-revolutionists," "the executioners of the people," worse than Russian agents of the gendarmery. The situation was ripe for the resurrection of the Red Guard to fight against the Protective Corps.
The Russians understood the intention to act. In October a representative of the Russian Working-men's and Soldiers' Council in Finland says at a Congress of Councillors in St. Petersburg: "Finland stands on the threshold of civil war, Finland's bourgeoisie is armed, and on the point of assaulting the Finnish proletariat. It is the duty of the council to disarm Finland's bourgeoisie and hand over the weapons to Finland's proletariat."
In the course of the summer the first corps of the Red Guard was formed. In October an appeal was issued from the leaders of the Labour Party to form such corps all over the country.