Karl Marx’s end goal-realistic or idealistic?

The dream of a classless and stateless society and a fixed roadmap towards the fulfilment of that goal may remind us of one of the genius of the first Marxist- Karl Marx. Surely, his interpretations of history and class struggle and social discrepancies were skewed towards economic conditions of those times but the one who has studied Karl Marx in depth cannot deny that he was both a realist and a utopian idealist. A realist because he depended his theories around the industrial revolution and capitalism rising scenarios which were quite factual of his times, although he forgo a big part of human motivations like culture, communitarianism, geographical conditions and psychology and changes in those spheres with changed areas of locality and nationality; yet he was quite good at planning his theory of class struggle in the history as well as his contemporary times around two existing classes. But when he talked about and interpreted a classless and stateless society, one could easily take him as a utopian theorist because, first of all, state was made for the management of the masses and if there would have been a stateless society, there would have been much despised anarchy everywhere and the discrimination that he sought to end could get elevated; secondly, the means he talked about to reach that end i.e. revolution by the proletariat (have-nots) against the bourgeoisie (haves), somehow after being in power the proletariat could take the character of the bourgeoisie and would have begun to abuse that economic power in their hands, thus still the struggle would have persisted with the places exchanged between haves and have-nots where only the people would have exchanged their positions yet the characters of exploitation by haves of have-nots staying stuck in that pattern only. The idea of a classless and stateless society was undoubtedly praise-worthy but in a society where the human motivation is not only determined by economic factors but also by the greed to be in power over others, it was certainly utopian because no matter how many people be egalitarian in their approach, still the forces who want to over-power others sustain in society contradictorily to the former and which can be meted out with the struggle for power, since times immemorial.