Yes Marx's teleological tendencies are his biggest problem. This isn't a groundbreaking assertion.
This is the lazy induction I'm talking about. History doesn't show anything as evidenced by people making the exact same arguments against democracy in the early modern period.
It's more than "teleological tendencies," it's that the absolute core of his concept of the rise of communism was completely off. Which is fine, whatever, but if your argument is that only a 1:1 adaptation of Marx is Real Communism then you're just delving further into "My ideaology only fails when you bring it into the real world" territory.
What an incredibly reductionist strawman. Everyone with a brain has some problems with Marx, but acting like one of the greatest social thinkers we have and an absolutely seminal fogufi in the social sciences is only paid attention to because he is cool is obviously absurd and smacks of contrarianism.
We aren't talking about Marx's entire body of work, we're talking specifically about his ideal of communism and its practicality in the real world. Which is quite ironic given communists could find a better role model in Bakunin who history has proven right in many respects, but instead they hitch their horse to Marx's constrained definition which has been undermined at every turn. Why this is is beyond me!