One of my favorite things to do is to listen to people who have a totally different point of view. I also like to research the opposite take on any popular belief. I find this to make my judgment much more balanced.

It’s so easy to get seduced by the most popular opinion of today. That’s because to side with something that you hear is very easy, whilst doing extra research is hard.

For example, in the Western world the Dalai Lama is seen as such a peaceful and enlightened ruler loved by all. In the media you can hear mostly very positive things about this public figure.

He became famous when he escaped Tibet. The reason you see so many heavily loaded horses is because he took all his wealth with him. He is a multi-millionaire flying all over the world to give paid speeches.

Listen to “Why You Should Always Be Willing to Look at the Opposite Point of View” on Spreaker.

Tibet remains extremely poor. His multi-millions donated to help improve this small population would surely help. He was also involved with the CIA to help portray China in a very bad light as it’s considered the enemy of the USA.

The Chinese have a bad opinion about him, therefore. I remember reading how insulted the Chinese students of California University in San Diego were when without consulting them the Dalai Lama was invited to speak at a commencement ceremony for the 2016-2017 academic year.

They even wrote a letter to the university’s chancellor explaining how disrespectful that would be to their parents who were preparing to fly all the way from China to see them. They would have to endure the speech of someone whom they consider an enemy.

I think it was disrespectful to not consult a large Chinese community before inviting such a speaker. But most websites which covered this issue do not wish to see the Chinese point of view.

The Chinese are unhappy with the Dalai Lama for many reasons. They claim him to want to rule Tibet on his own not for spiritual or peace purposes. Obviously there is money in keeping the rule of the people.

China claims lamas to have had a tyrannical rule over Tibetans, and they say that pre-Communist Tibet was a terrible place.

They claim that only 5% of people were land owners and the rest of the population – serfs. They had no freedom as they were owned together with land. Land owners inflicted severe punishment for their misbehavior, from cutting off ears to skinning them alive.

---

---

We find very similar religious rituals in brahmanized Buddhism (Buddhism that became influenced by the Brahmanical religion of India).

So there’s one side of the story of the Dalai Lama trying to save Tibet from the cruel Chinese, and the other – of him being greedy for power and helping the CIA as it serves his purposes too.

His rule is justified by him being considered the incarnation of the saint patron of Tibet, which is quite similar to the divine right to rule found in the Bible.

I believe that both sides, the Chinese and Tibetan, spread some untruths trying to justify their sides so one should take what both say with a pinch of salt. Each view has to be investigated and weighed properly.

I’m researching these subjects not so much to understand which one is right (as it takes a lot of searching to really determine who’s right about global issues as such, plus knowing Chinese would help a lot) but more to open myself up to a totally different point of view.

I find this to expand my worldview and I like to have the choice of which opinion to support. Sometimes people do not have such a choice because they are either not willing to see the opposite argument or they are denied the exposure to it. So they quickly side with the popular opinion thinking themselves in the know.

I hope that this example will encourage you to always consider the other side. No judge would be fair to release a suspect with a believable story without hearing someone disagreeing with the accused.

And though sometimes it’s tempting to side with a nice-sounding version of reality, you never know whether it’s true unless you are willing to see both sides of the situation.

P.S. I apolize if there were any grammatical mistakes in this article. I’ve just came back to my hut in Lithuania, and I have no laptop adapter so I had to publish this piece fast before the battery ran out.