would have

Question

"The nature of Communism is such that Stalin would have fallen back on the use of force as his trusted means of governance anyway, when resistance to his policies inevitably arose."

Should I say "when resistance to his policies would inevitably arise" or "when resistance to his policies inevitably arose"?

Thank you.

Anonymous · Accepted Answer

"The nature of Communism is such that, Stalin would have fallen back on the use of force as his trusted means of governance when resistance to his policies inevitably arose."

I added a comma after "that" and before "Stalin" (Because it's an introductory phrase).
I took out the word "anyway"
and removed the comma between the words: "anyway" and "when"
The phrase "when resistance to his policies inevitably arose" is a dependent clause, preceding it is an independent clause therefore there is no comma necessary between the two clauses.

AlpheccaStars · Answer

Hi Super;

I would keep it as written. Stalin is long dead, and all of these events are in the distant past, so past tense is fine.
There was no question of whether his policies would be resisted or not. (That's why "inevitably" is used.) The policies were draconian, and people resisted, but with the consequences of assassination, exile, or long residences in prison camps in Siberia.

There is no problem with "anyway" because it is expressing a contrast in its context.
The commas are OK, too.

RandomGuy · Answer

AnonymousI added a comma after "that" and before "Stalin" (Because it's an introductory phrase).

Anonymouspreceding it is an independent clause therefore there is no comma necessary between the two clauses.

This isn't always the case. Comma usage isn't as black and white as you seem to think.

would have

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions