system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
Karl Poppers critiques of Marx

I’ve seen someone say that if any Marxist read Karl Poppers critiques of Marx they would stop being Marxists. I’ve only seen strawman critiques of Marx from most liberal thinkers. Could someone inform me on what Karl Poppers critiques of Marx are is there any merit to them?
gpt
Although Popper does address Marxism specifically, much of his work focuses on the Hegelian idea of Historicism which heavily influenced Marx. 

His two most widely-accepted books (The Poverty of Historicism, The Open Society and Its Enemies) offer a number of scathing rebuttals to Hegel. There are too many to name here, but here are a few.

Historicism has less predictive value than Hegelians like to believe. Past historical events can’t be proven to predict future historical events and many of its tenets aren’t really falsifiable (Popper saw falsifiability as the hallmark of the rational scientific process since causal relationships are impossible to prove). Beyond this, there is simply too much information to be examined in any given society, resulting in a selection bias that can’t account for societal changes or the ways that future scientific developments will shape societies. Finally, Historicism can’t consistently predict at which point historical trends cease or change.

Popper is a very serious philosopher and among the greatest of the 20th century. His critiques are generally accepted to have merit.