askchapo

I could see some subsection of overly online contrarians without much knowledge of actual history claiming that they wished Sweden-Norway never dissolved — but the general public? Hmm...

I think it's telling that there are evidently no organizations that support a revival of Sweden-Norway, and no readily available opinion polls about support for a hypothetical "reunification". You'd think that if it was at all a common opinion that both of these things would exist.

I would say that there is broad support in Norway for regional cooperation with Sweden and other Nordic countries, but this isn't really the same as wanting to bring back the old union, is it? Because who exactly would reunionism help‽ It would be regression of a type that not even chuds would want!

Quoting V. I. Lenin, The Right of Nations to Self-Determination:

The geographic, economic and language ties between Norway and Sweden are as intimate as those between the Great Russians and many other Slav nations. But the union between Norway and Sweden was not a voluntary one, and in dragging in the question of “federation” Rosa Luxemburg was talking at random, simply because she did not know what to say. Norway was ceded to Sweden by the monarchs during the Napoleonic wars, against the will of the Norwegians; and the Swedes had to bring troops into Norway to subdue her.

Despite the very extensive autonomy which Norway enjoyed (she had her own parliament, etc.), there was constant friction between Norway and Sweden for many decades after the union, and the Norwegians strove hard to throw off the yoke of the Swedish aristocracy. At last, in August 1905, they succeeded: the Norwegian parliament resolved that the Swedish king was no longer king of Norway, and in the referendum held later among the Norwegian people, the overwhelming majority (about 200,000 as against a few hundred) voted for complete separation from Sweden. After a short period of indecision, the Swedes resigned themselves to the fact of secession.

This example shows us on what grounds cases of the secession of nations are practicable, and actually occur, under modern economic and political relationships, and the form secession sometimes assumes under conditions of political freedom and democracy.

Edit: Setting aside political support for the Union, I could still see at least some number of "normal" people having some form of "anemoia" for Norway in the 19th century in the same way as for anywhere else in the 19th century. I don't know how common this is, but it doesn't seem far fetched. You should pry into what exactly the "Norwedish" guy meant in any case.