"Language is more than a medium for communication. It’s an instrument of power, a measure of humanity, a map for world-making. It is also never neutral." Nuanced insight on the necessity of speaking "Chinese" to know China @yangyang_cheng https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/jan/13/understand-china-speak-chinese-english-language

Also a great time to re-up this great thread on linguistic gatekeeping by @ourobororoboruo, which similarly looks at this question through the lens of power and privilege https://twitter.com/ourobororoboruo/status/1336688667679666177

The point both make is that any gatekeeping concerning who has the right to speak on any topic needs to consider who benefits from that gatekeeping. Are we upholding existing unequal (and often historically colonial) power structures in the construction of knowledge?

This question is multifaceted. As @yangyang_cheng points out, learning "Chinese" in these discussions of expertise usually means Mandarin; here linguistic gatekeeping benefits the PRC state, which seeks to hegemonically represent Chinese-ness worldwide.

Linguistic gatekeeping also often benefits white men, who might have more access to language-learning resources, and more importantly, benefit from the universal presumption of their expertise and neutrality, meaning their voices are often privileged over nonwhite, nonmale voices

This doesn't mean learning a Chinese language isn't unimportant! But the way we talk about it as a skill should take into account the specific kinds of expertise it provides, as well as how questions of privilege and power grant some people the right to speak over others