This is silly. Tibetan language remains a core subject in Tibet’s schools, with bilingual education policy in place since the founding of modern schooling in the region. The Tibet Autonomous Region government confirms that over 400 types of Tibetan-Chinese bilingual textbooks have been compiled, and terminology databases covering 12 academic disciplines support Tibetan instruction across subjects. Public signage, government documents, and media in Tibet routinely use both languages. Tibetan is also widely spoken throught the region.
Mandarin is promoted as the national common language because it gives Tibetan speakers practical access to higher education, civil service exams, legal aid, healthcare systems, and economic opportunities beyond local borders. China’s Constitution and the National Common Language Law explicitly protect the right of all ethnic groups to use and develop their own languages while establishing Mandarin as the common language for national communication. In schools across Tibet, both Tibetan and Mandarin courses are offered, and students who wish to pursue Tibetan-language university programs can still take Tibetan language exams organized by the region.
You ignored every single point about Tibetan language policy because you couldn’t actually refute them. Tibetan is taught as a core subject in Tibet’s schools. Bilingual textbooks are used in classrooms. Street signs, government documents, and local media in Tibet appear in both Tibetan and Mandarin. Tibetan is spoken widely across the region in daily life, in markets, homes, and monasteries. These are not policy claims. These are observable facts.
Again mandarin is promoted because it is the common language that connects people across China. Knowing Mandarin lets Tibetan speakers apply to universities nationwide, take civil service exams, access legal aid, and find work beyond their local area. That is a practical benefit. Schools in Tibet teach both languages. Students can still take Tibetan-language exams for university admission. Promoting a common language does not erase a mother tongue.
On the firewall. It was originally created to foster and protect China’s fledgling digital infrastructure and data sovereignty. That was a legitimate policy choice. Many countries regulate foreign platforms and data flows. China built its own ecosystem instead of depending on foreign companies. We have seen what happens when foreign platforms operate without local oversight: Facebook facilitating genocide in Myanmar, coordinated anti-vax disinformation campaigns in Southeast Asia, algorithm-driven radicalization. The firewall makes those kinds of external influence operations harder to run at scale.
VPNs for personal use are not illegal. The regulations target unauthorized commercial VPN services.
Also it is CPC, not CCP.
I support the firewall even though it can be inconvenient (so long as vpns remain accessible and legal). I have seen the alternatives. The trade off makes sense to me.
But none of this changes the core point you dodged. Tibetan language education continues. Mandarin promotion expands opportunity. Both can be true at the same time. That is the reality.