Hey comrades, can someone please enlighten me on the holes that I have on my knowledge of China. I know that China currently has a restricted bourgeoisie class to be able to get enough capital to modernize the entire country. And that makes me wonder, if China has plans to eventually get rid of their bourgeoisie once it achieves it target goal. Does it have ever set a date or a specific plan on this?
As far as I'm aware, China doesn't plan on changing what it's currently doing. People read predictions like "China will be a prosperous socialist country by 2050" and think that means they will start phasing out their market economy and private property before that date. But I don't think they will. As far as I'm aware, everything indicates that the CPC believes that what they are currently doing IS socialism. There is also a very strong reaction to the obviously untrue US propaganda created to make people hostile to China, which leads to a lot of leftists counterjerking very hard and denying that any criticism can be made of the direction that Marxism has taken in the country.
Except that if you read their theory and literature, it's not that they believe what they are doing 'is socialism' it's that they believe that 'socialism' occurs in stages, with the properties of those stages emergent within the contradictions and economic circumstances of their era. Communism, according to marxist analysis, is the social movement that emerges from the contradictions of capitalism, but marxism does not define what that movement is or looks like (a fundamental critique of Marx by Mao), and China operates in a fundamentally different manner than any other country of it's kind. The differences between them and India, despite theoretically occupying the same rung on the global economic ladder, are stark, and evidence of this.
If their theory is sound will remain to be seen, but what is clear is that they are still here and doing 'communism' while the USSR is not. They have forded the contradictions into this new, bleaker era, keeping the torch of Marxism and Marxist analysis, however dim, lit, and that is to be commended, as much as their foreign policy is to be criticized.