| dc.description.abstract | A war between the Whites and the Reds was fought in Finland in the winter of 1918. A central problem has been whether the war should be regarded as a war of independence or as a civil war. This investigation does not attempt to establish the best name for the war, but poses the question of how the Whites depicted their cause in their war propaganda during winter 1918. Propaganda is defined as activity which, by repeating simple images and phrases, strives to modify people's attitudes in a desirable manner. The study is focussed on the proclamations of the White leaders and the editorials of the bourgeois newspapers; use is also made of archive materials. Traditional historical methods are used in the investigation, supplemented by statistical content analysis of the editorials. The study shows that the imagery and vocabulary of the White propaganda had already come into being during the struggles between the Finnish political parties at the beginning of the century, or derived from the war propaganda of the great powers. In their propaganda the Whites emphasized that the Finnish people as a whole had risen in a sacred, cleansing fight to rid the country of the criminals who, should they win, would drag into the mire all that was noble and good, destroy Finnish culture and put an end to Finland's recent independence. In accordance with their idealistic outlook, the Whites branded the Reds as embodying metaphysical evil. Their own set of values the Whites considered absolute. During the first half of February 1918 the Ostrobothnian newspapers generally referred to the war as a war of liberation, while those of eastern Finland called it a civil war. The term war of independence ('vapaussota', a term specifically emphasizing a fight against Soviet Russia) was adopted in February by Activists and Jägers, who had been preparing for an insurrection against Russia since 1915. In order to justify the German invasion and their own East-Karelian policy, the White leadership started in their propaganda of March and April to exaggerate the role of Soviet Russia in these events. At the same time thorough-going anti-Russian attitudes and the use of the term war of independence also became more widespread in the newspapers published in the White heartland. Outside the areas controlled by the Whites, however, bourgeois individuals and papers regarded the conflict as a civil war. It was paradoxical that as the role of the Russians in these events diminished, the anti-Russian element in the White propaganda grew stronger. This was not actually brought about by Russian measures but by the Whites' own activities and aspirations. | en |
