I thought it was interesting that throughout the time following Stalin’s reign, their were multiple de-Stalinizations and re-Stalinizations. After Stalin the period of de-Stalinization occurred; it was a time when Khrushchev made many reforms to do the opposite of all that Stalin enforced. Then after Khrushchev, Brezhnev took over and a period of limited re-Stalinization occurred. Every time a ruler was kicked, the new ruler did almost the exact opposite. However, after Brezhnev, more re-Stalinization happened to make a stronger dictatorship.
I think that in America we have a lot (not all) of successors who do the opposite of the prior ruler. I think it is in part because the people cannot truly decide what they want or who could give it to them during elections. But when people run for president they usually feed mainly off of the negative criticism there is for the current president and plan to do the opposite to make the country happy; yet, doing the opposite doesn’t always work. Do you think that rulers like to do the opposite of their past ruler? Why do you think that is? Do you think it is because of popular influence or media?